Chris Christou : The End of Tourism Podcast

S7 #4 | The Sufi Guest House | Kerim Güç (Kerim Vakfı)

Chris Christou — Wed, 18 Mar 2026 13:07:47 GMT

On this episode, my guest is Hasan Kerim Güç. Kerim graduated from Istanbul High School in 1992 and from Yildiz Technical University in 1996. Between 1997-2004, he completed his master's degree in Information Systems and Business Administration in Baltimore, USA. He returned to Turkey in 2010. Realizing that the treasure he had been looking for for 14 years was right in his own home, he took the position of Chief Editor at Nefes Publishing House in 2014. Kerim nourishes his business life with Sufi studies and is pursuing a doctoral degree from the Usküdar University Institute for Sufi Studies. He has published four books.

Rejecting the American Dream
Anatolian and Sufi Hospitality
Sufis and the Ottomans
Tanri misafiri (“God’s guest”)
Togetherness, and the roots of Religion
When we welcome suffering, we make honey out of pain
Submission, servants and the prophet Mohammed
The Conference of the Birds / Stories from the Thirty Birds
Limits to hospitality in the Islamic world
Bereket / Baraka
Rumi’s Guest House

Homework

Transcript

Chris: [00:00:00] Welcome to the End of Tourism podcast, Kerim. Hoș geldiniz.

Kerim: Thank you very much for having me.

Chris: Yeah, it’s my pleasure. Thank you for joining me today. Perhaps you could tell our listeners, where you find yourself and what the world looks like there for you.

Kerim: Well, first of all, I’m an immigrant also. I was an immigrant. I lived in the US for a while, and then I came back to to my own country. And things are very different here than there, than it is in US. From the perspective of what I did... I was actually an engineer, and I was working in the IT fields, and I was living the American dream, and then I realized that there was some kind of an emptiness, and this whole thing, and I decided to go back to Turkey and [00:01:00] study Sufism, and since my mother was actually a Sufi teacher. She decided to actually move this whole Sufism into academia. So, she basically established an institute in Istanbul - Üsküdar Istanbul - at the University of Üsküdar. The difference between this institute and the other schools, the people like myself, like engineers, coming from different disciplines, including lawyers and whatnot, they were not able to do their masters or PhDs in Sufism, because in other universities, they require for you to actually have theology backgrounds. But with this new establishment, we were able to educate people from all different disciplines and, [00:02:00] so we basically concentrated on ethics rather than the religion itself.

So, a lot of people coming from different areas, especially the white-collar people, living this, like - how do I say that? - it’s a world of money and materialism and all kind of that stuff. They’re coming to our institute and realizing that money or career is not the only goal for life.

And we started to concentrating on things like spirituality more than the materialist world.

Chris: Thank you. Well, I’m very much looking forward to exploring these themes with you and a little bit of the work that you do with Kerim Vakfı.

Kerim: Sure.

Chris: And so for the last season of the podcast, I’m very much interested in focusing on different hospitality traditions and practices from around the [00:03:00] world, as I mentioned to you. And, one of the key themes of the podcast is radical hospitality. Now, the word “radical” comes from Latin and it means “rooted,” or we might even say “local” or “living.”

And so. I’m curious if there are any radical hospitality practices that you think are unique to your place, to Istanbul, or to the Sufi community that you might be willing to share with us today?

Kerim: Well, Istanbul, actually, is a very metropolitan city. So like the other metropolitan cities, we kind of lost that - what we call the hospitality of Anatolia. Anatolia is basically the Eastern part of Istanbul. And in Istanbul, we have, right now, 25 million people in a very small area. And in older days when the population was smaller, [00:04:00] we were able to show our hospitality, because the Turkish hospitality is very famous, actually. In this area the hospitality is very famous, including the, you know, Greek and Arab hospitality. Usually, it’s a little bit different than the western countries.

For instance, we welcome people - we used to, and probably still, in the countryside - the people coming from other cities or countries or whatnot. The locals actually helped them out as much as possible. They even invite them to their own houses and let them stay for how long they want to stay. And this was kind of like a regular thing in the old days. It’s still going on very much in the eastern side of Turkey, pretty much in the countryside. [00:05:00] But Istanbul, like other cosmopolitan cities, we kinda lost that. You know, neighbourly things. We have a lot of neighbours and we we have always good... we used to have a lot of good relationship with them, but nowadays, again, because of this material world, we kind of lost this hospitality.

So from the Sufi point of view, hospitality is very important. It’s interesting that you mentioned the “radical.” You were talking about where “radical” come from, but you didn’t talk about where “hospitality” comes from. See, there is a relationship between the hospital and the hospitality and the way the Sufis look at things is very much like the illnesses in our body are our guests. So, we don’t think that they’re bad for you. They’re actually [00:06:00] the guests of our house for a time being. So we show them the hospitality as much as we can, and then hopefully we say goodbye to them.

Chris: Wow. Wow. That’s fascinating. I do know that the term “hospitality,” hospital is part of that, and hospital historically came from these notions of hospitality. I mean, in the western world in, and at least in the Christian world, there’s a kind of unauthorized history in which a lot of this hospitality, as you mentioned, that was offered to the stranger, was done by the families or the individual houses or homes within a community. A stranger would come and they would ask for hospitality, ask for food and shelter, and the family would have to decide whether to do that and how to do it. [00:07:00] And then at some point, the institution of the Church kind of stepped in and said, “you know what? You don’t have to do this anymore. When the stranger comes to the community, when they show up at your door, just send them to us. Just send them to the church and we’ll give them what they need.”

And so this did a number of things, but the two most obvious ones, I think, are that the family, the individuals in the family and the community on a grassroots level, slowly ended up losing their ability, their unique kind of familial or personal ability to host the stranger. And at the same time, of course, the church used this as a way to try to convert, the stranger.

Kerim: Right.

Chris: And so I’m curious if there’s anything in that realm that you see in the Islamic world, maybe in the Sufi world... you mentioned that, since the [00:08:00] imposition of modernity and the industrial Revolution in the world, we see less and less possibilities for small-scale, grassroots hospitality between people, in part, because there’s so much movement, and of course, because the hospital has its brothers and sisters in the sense of the “hotel” and the “hostel.”

Kerim: Absolutely.

Chris: So, I’m curious if there’s anything like that that comes to mind for you in regards to the Islamic world.

Kerim: Well, one thing is about like the Ottomans. The Ottomans, when they were coming from the Anatolia and then started conquering all those places in the Balkan area, Greece and Bulgaria, Hungary and all those places, after they actually conquered, they sent Sufis to those places. And, like in Hungary, there is a person, his name is [00:09:00] Gül Baba, which means “Rose Father.” That’s what they call him. He actually has his own tekke (tekke is like a church for Sufis). And this place, it’s like a school more, more like a school, but it’s a religious school.

And in this tekke, he actually finds all those people with needs, and he pretty much helped them out with all those needs. And the people coming from different religions, they actually started liking people like from the Turks’ point of view, because the Turks were symbolized by these Sufi movements. And instead of, you know, pushing people to convert or demolishing the churches and rebuilding mosques and stuff. Instead of that, they actually [00:10:00] welcomed people from all over the world, or all over the place, basically, to stay in the tekke, to eat and to get education in the tekke. So this was a great strategy of Ottomans. That’s how they actually stayed in Europe for almost like 600 years. So that was very much like, you know, their strategy, I think. And in a good way.

Chris: Yeah, you know, in my research I found out that there’s still Sufi orders in the Balkans a group called the Bektashi.

Kerim: Right.

Chris: And of course, with the very little historical understanding that I had, I was very surprised. I had no idea. But of course, when I eventually went to visit the regions that my father is from, I saw churches, synagogues, and mosques, all in the same little neighbourhoods.

[00:11:00] So, quite an impressive kind of understanding that the major religions in those places could coexist for so long. And that in the context of someone who grew up in North America, who thought it was the opposite (previously) and such things are so difficult.

Kerim: Right. Right.

Chris: So, Kerim, a mutual friend of ours has told me, that in the Turkish language, there is a phrase (and excuse my pronunciation). The phrase is tanri misafiri.

Kerim: Right.

Chris: Which translates into English as something like “God’s guest.”

Kerim: Right.

Chris: Or “the guest sent by God.”

Kerim: Right. Right.

Chris: And so I’m wondering if you could speak about this phrase, maybe what it means to you and where you think it comes from?

Kerim: Well, in Anatolia, it’s a very famous phrase. And like I said previously, you know anybody coming from somewhere else, who comes into somebody’s [00:12:00] house, is allowed to stay in the house as “the guest of God,” because we believe that God has sent that guest to us and we try to... you know, it’s more like making that guest happy means making God happy. So, that’s the understanding of older generations.

In today’s metropolitan areas, I don’t think it’s possible because of the security problems and everything. But like I said, in the countryside, people are very welcoming when it comes to this, because it is very important that knowing that person is actually coming from God, from Allah, so we have to take care of that person as much as possible to please God, actually.

So that’s how it is. I still see that in many cities in the [00:13:00] more eastern side of Turkey or south side of Turkey, or even north side of Turkey except in the bigger cities. But in the smaller cities, people are much more welcoming, again because of this specific idiom, actually.

Chris: From tanri misafiri?

Kerim: Right. Tanri means “God” in our language. In the original Turkish language, it’s tanri, and, misafiri means “ the guest.”

Chris: Yeah. So beautiful. Thank you for sharing that with us.

Kerim: Absolutely.

Chris: And so when guests arrive in a home, you know, in English, at least in, in the context of the older traditions, it is said that the guest or the potential guest, the stranger, asks for hospitality. They don’t necessarily say “ they ask for food,” which we can imagine that surely they [00:14:00] do. They don’t necessarily say that “they ask for shelter” or “accommodation,” which we surely we could imagine they do. But the literature often says they ask for hospitality.

And so, when we think of hospitality today, we often think about people sitting around a table eating food together. And so I’m curious if there’s a shared understanding among Sufis or at least the community that you live among and in, about the importance of both eating food and eating food together.

Kerim: Togetherness is probably one of the most important things in the Islamic religion. Because like even our way of worshiping God - Allah - we try to do that in a union as much as possible. It is very interesting, the words that “religion” comes from.

[00:15:00] Re- means “again,” and legion means “union.”

So it’s almost like “religion” itself means “to recreate the union,” “to reshape the union,” “ to have the union back,” because we have the tendency to be alone. And even you can imagine that in the western countries, in the western world, a lot of people want to be alone.

Like, there’s a lot of individuals rather than a group of people. And in the eastern world, it’s a little bit different. We are more like family-oriented people. We try to do things together. I mean, there are advantages and disadvantages obviously, but there is a difference between them.

So, we always had this [notion that] “the more is better,” basically. You know, more people is better. So, we help each other, [00:16:00] we understand each other, we talk about our problems. When we try to solve them, it’s easier together. And if there’s pain, you know, the pain actually, can be eased with more people, easier, I think, compared to have this pain alone. So, again, we’re more family-oriented people.

And the Sufi are very much like that. The Sufi always pray together, and they think that it creates a n energy, basically. It produces an energy that basically helps all of them at the same time, in a union.

Chris: Hmm hmm. And do you find that sitting down for a meal together also creates that kind of union, or recreates as you were saying?

Kerim: I think so. Doing any kind of activities, including eating... eating is basically the most common activity [00:17:00] that we do in our daily life and getting together, to talk about our things together, and discuss things together, all those things - togetherness, when it comes to the idea of togetherness - I think, is beautiful.

Chris: Hmm, hmm. Amen. Yeah, I very much agree with that, Kerim.

And so, when we think about hospitality, and we think about food, we often imagine big banquet tables and as you said, this sense of togetherness and celebration.

But there’s also, you know, from what little I’ve read, there’s also this important aspect of the religious life in the Islamic world, and perhaps in the Sufi world as well that points to, maybe not the absence of food, but a different way of being fed, and a different way of feeding that doesn’t [00:18:00] include the food we’re used to, the kind of material food. And we often refer to this as fasting. And so, there’s a beautiful video that you sent me, Kerim, of your mother speaking, and she recalls a phrase in that video from her own mother who said that “when we welcome suffering, we make honey out of pain.”

And so, this is a question I very much want to ask you because I’ve fasted myself quite intensely. I’m curious, what is the honey that comes from fasting? Or, what do you think is the honey that comes from fasting?

Kerim: Right? First of all, yeah, fasting is in our religion. So, we basically do that one month in the whole year. It’s called Ramadan. In some cases, we actually do that because our Prophet Muhammad, when he [00:19:00] lived, he was fasting every Monday and every Thursday. So it was like a common practice for some of the religious people. And at least we do that one month in the whole year.

And obviously, that month is a little bit difficult, you know, because we not only stop eating, we also stopped drinking and all that stuff. In theory, we should not be lying, we should not be telling bad things to other people or gossiping and all that stuff, but usually we do during that time. I mean, in theory, we should not be doing that.

So it’s like a whole discipline thing - the whole fasting. And at the end of the thirty days, you become a really, really different person. And first of all, one thing that [00:20:00] I feel, is that you understand the people who do not have food. We still have people in the world, unfortunately, in Africa, and all those places, the people, having less access to food as we do, and we feel like, oh yeah we don’t actually thank God for all those things that he’s giving to us. And this is the time that you start thinking about the reality and start thanking God for actually giving us all that food, twenty-four hours, seven days [a week]. And when you are fasting during that time, you are understanding the feeling of these people, who are like poor and who cannot eat.

There are people now, in the social media, we are seeing people, who never had [00:21:00] chocolates in their life. The people living in these countries or in the cities or metropolitan cities, we never think about these things.

So, we take these things for granted, and during that time of fasting, you start thinking about these stuff and then you become more thankful, and that’s basically honey itself, after the suffering. And I wouldn’t say “suffering,” because we don’t suffer as much as they do, honestly.

And we’re just telling our egos, “just stop for a day to do bad things and stop eating,” and all that stuff that ego wants to have. And again, it’s at the end of the thirty days, you become a new person because now you have a different mentality. Now, in the other eleven months, you still forget about these things, but [00:22:00] again, it comes through. It’s like a cycle.

Chris: Yeah. Yeah. I totally agree with you that, you know, gratitude is the honey and...

Kerim: Absolutely.

Chris: ...I remember the fasting that I did over the course of four years, and I don’t know if it was as intense as the fasting that happens during Ramadan, but doing that fasting and trying to feed something other than myself for a time imbued a degree of hospitality and gratitude that I don’t think I had ever felt before. And it sticks to me. It sticks to my bones to this day. And it’s something that, like you said, I also have to constantly remind myself of those moments when I sit down to eat a meal, because it’s so easy to forget.

Kerim: Absolutely. Absolutely. And one thing is [00:23:00] basically during that time of fasting, you basically stop feeding your ego, and start feeding your spirit, basically. That’s what I think.

Chris: That’s beautiful. Yeah. I absolutely understand that. Thank you, Kerim.

So my next question is around the word “ submission.” So, translated into English, the word “Islam” means “submission.” Now I’ve read that this word can also be translated to mean “servants of God.” Servants of God.

Now in English, the word “servant” can be synonymous with “host.” A servant and a host. Now, there’s a book by an author named Mona Siddiqui called Hospitality in Islam. And in that book she writes, it’s actually a quote, but she writes,

“’What is faith?’ The Prophet replied, ‘the giving of [00:24:00] food and the exchange of greetings.’ He ends on a most dramatic note saying, “a house which is not entered by guests is not entered by angels.”

Kerim: Perfect. Yeah.

Chris: And it seems that in this phrase, the Prophet is suggesting that the way we are with guests and strangers has something to do with how we are with the divine, which I think you kind of alluded to a little bit earlier.

And so I’m curious, is this something that you’ve seen in your own days or in those of others that you know? Is hospitality a practice that connects us to the divine?

Kerim: Absolutely. Because reaching God, you need to reach people first. To be able to reach God... when I say “reach God,” meaning be in communication with Him, is basically being in a communication [00:25:00] with the people he created. So, to serve the people is basically serving him from the Islamic point of view.

So, and that’s a hadith that you mentioned in the book. It’s a hadith of Prophet Mohammed, like you said. And Prophet Mohammed always... it was a common practice that he was hosting maybe, you know, 10-15 people every night. And he was a poor person, by the way. I mean, he doesn’t have much money, much food or anything, but they share. There was a time that... there’s a story that somebody, actually, one of his apostles rather, asks him to visit him for a dinner. So he invites him to a dinner.

But during his conversation, Prophet Mommed said, “can I bring my friends too?”[00:26:00]

And the apostle says, “of course you can bring your friends.” And he brings hundreds of people. Now, the host only have some bread, and maybe a little bit meat, and a little bit rice in the cup.

So, he was ashamed because he doesn’t have any money, and the Prophet Mohammed is going to bring all those guests together, and he didn’t know what to do. But he uses submission, basically.

He said, well, if Prophet Mohammed is coming, then something is going to happen. And as he was thinking all those things, Prophet Mohammed puts his hand on top of the rice holder. And every time he was putting rice onto the dishes, the rice never ends, the meat never ends. So he served like 200 people during this invitation and the food never ended.[00:27:00]

So he was happy for his submission, basically.

Chris: Wow. Beautiful. Thank you, Kerim.

Kerim: Of course.

Chris: You know, you have this beautiful book - that is still in the mail, unfortunately I haven’t got my hands on it yet, but I’m very much looking forward to it - called Stories From the Thirty Birds, which I understand is inspired by The Conference of the Birds, this incredible book from I think the 1300s.

And I’m curious if you could tell us a little bit about that book and what, if any inspiration or maybe teachings around hospitality that come from both, The Conference of the Birds and how you’ve employed it in your book.

Kerim: Right. The Conference of the Birds is really a beautiful story of Farid ud-Din Attar who lived in Nishapur, which is in Khorasan, in Iran, today. And he was one of the very famous [00:28:00] Sufis at that time. He was the teacher of Rumi. A lot of people know Rumi. And he wrote this book about birds, millions of birds, who are in the process of going to their king, which is the phoenix (or what we call it simurg). And during that time, during that travel, they go through seven valleys, and in each valley some of the birds get lost, because the valleys actually symbolize things.

Like, the first valley is the valley of intention. So, a lot of birds actually don’t have the intention to reach their king. The king is basically symbolizing Allah (God), and the birds are symbolizing us very much, and we are getting [00:29:00] lost during the time of life. Like, our intention is basically this world. If our intention is staying in this world, then we stay in this world. And that’s the valley of intention.

And a lot of birds, like half of them, actually, get lost in this stage.

And the second valley is the valley of love. And the birds that get lost in this valley are the ones that actually think the beauty is in this world, rather than they don’t see the beauty of God himself. So they see the shadow of that beauty in the world, but they’re content with that beauty, and they don’t really want to move on.

And again, the third valley is the value of wisdom. And the birds that get lost in this valley are the ones who think that knowledge, [00:30:00] in this world, is more important than anything else, and they don’t realize the source of the knowledge is actually their king.

So on and so forth, they go through the seven valleys and at the end of the seventh valley, only thirty birds remain. And the thirty birds, they’re ready to see their king, and they go through this mountain called Qaf, where the simurg, the phoenix lives (behind the mountain). And it’s very difficult to get there, basically. When they get there, they can’t find the king over there. They only find a mirror. So, they realize the king is themselves, but more specifically, the union of thirty birds. So simurg - the [00:31:00] phoenix - in Iranian, in Persian means “thirty birds,” actually. Si is “thirty.” “Burg” is “bird,” actually.

So from what we understand is, the union of ourselves, what we are seeing, is our reflection, because the king is actually a perfect mirror. But we don’t see ourselves, only, we see the union of thirty birds together. So there are birds that we don’t think live together. For instance, a hawk doesn’t live with a smaller bird together, but in this union, they live together. There in one. And they use whatever advantage they have together. So it’s almost like being one and using the characteristics of every single bird [00:32:00] itself.

Chris: And I imagine that someone growing up in a culture like that, whether back then or more recently, and hearing this story or hearing it multiple times throughout their life or maybe once a year, that that notion also might arise in the way that they are with others, the way they are with strangers.

Kerim: Right.

Chris: And so, I have one final question for you, if that’s all right?

Kerim: Absolutely.

Chris: So, before we say farewell I’d like to ask you about Istanbul, and I’d like to ask you about the limits to hospitality. So, last year, on a trip I took to the city I met a friend of a mutual friend of ours, and for a couple of hours we walked around the Karakoy neighbourhood and he spoke to me about how the city has changed quite a bit over the last decade.

For many people who grew up in Istanbul, the city [00:33:00] might now appear to be very difficult to live in. He said that the cost of living has skyrocketed. The rents, the rent prices or costs have doubled. And much of this is a combination of tourism and gentrification in the city.

Now it seems that many religious traditions speak of the importance of welcoming strangers and offering them hospitality, but they also speak of the limits to such hospitality. In one particular, hadith or saying of the Prophet Mohammed, it is said that “hospitality is for three days. Anything more is charity or sadaqah.”

Again, excuse my pronunciation.

Kerim: No. That’s perfect pronunciation.

Chris: And so I’m curious, you mentioned a little bit earlier, in the Sufi community and perhaps in the Islamic communities, there is this notion of togetherness, but also that “more is better.” And so I’m [00:34:00] curious in the context of what’s happening in Istanbul and what’s happening in many places around the world, do you think there should also be limits to the hospitality that is offered to the guest or stranger?

Kerim: Well, of course. I mean, of course we have financial issues here, and it’s very difficult for us to actually serve other people as much as we want to. But again, when we are together, even if it’s very difficult to live in the city, it’s still something, you know?

What I see: the rent went up, like you said, so the people try to move into their family houses, the houses there of their families and everything. And in western countries, it’s difficult. You usually don’t do this kind of stuff, but in our community, it’s much easier to do these things. And, you know, the families welcome the children [00:35:00] more than other countries. So that’s something I think that’s a positive thing.

But to the strangers. What do we do for strangers? Obviously, we do as much as possible. We may not be able to serve them as much as we used to, obviously, before this inflation. And we have the highest inflation in the world, or probably the second-highest inflation. So again, it’s difficult, and Istanbul became probably one of the most expensive cities in the world. But even that, again, we may not be able to take them to dinner every night, but we serve what we have in the house, like in the Prophet Mohammed’s story.

Whatever we have, we share. And, we call it bereket, as in Arabic baraka, they call it. Baraka is something [00:36:00] like... we use it for money. It’s not “more money.” That’s not important. How do I say that? I don’t even know how to say it in English, but it’s more like “the luck of the money, itself.” Basically, you may be able to buy more stuff with less money based on your luck. That’s basically what we call it. Bereket. So the bereket is much more important than the amount of the money or the financial thing. And the bereket always goes up when you share it.

Chris: Beautiful. Yeah, I love that. I mean, in English, not to reduce it at all, but in English we say, quality over quantity.”

Kerim: Yeah, absolutely.

Chris: And you said that, in order to offer hospitality or the hospitality that we would like to offer to our guests, sometimes maybe that means not doing it all the time, [00:37:00] because one simply cannot. Right. It’s not possible.

Kerim: Right.

Chris: But yeah, it’s a really beautiful point.

Kerim: Rumi is a very important Sufi, probably known by many Americans. Even the world knows him. He wrote a poem, which is about the guests. So, if you don’t mind, I’m gonna read that, uh, it’s called the Guest House and it goes like:

This human life is a guest house. Every dawn, a new visitor arrives.

A gladness, a sadness, a pettiness, a flash of insights all come knocking, unannounced.

Welcome them all. Make room even if a band of sorrows storms in

and clears your rooms of comfort.

Still honour every guest.

[00:38:00] Perhaps they empty you to prepare you for something brighter.

The gloomy thought, the shame, the bitterness,

greet them at the door with a smile, and lead them inside.

Be thankful for whoever comes, for each is sent as a messenger from the beyond.

So that’s a poem by Rumi, and I think it pretty much explains the whole hospitality thing.

Chris: Yeah, that’s a gorgeous, gorgeous poem. I love that. I’ll make sure that’s up on the End of Tourism website when the episode launches.

And so finally, Kerim, uh, I’d like to thank you so very much for being willing to join me today, to be willing to speak in a language that is not your first, or mother tongue, and to share with us some of the beauty that has touched your days. Before we say goodbye, [00:39:00] perhaps you could tell our listeners how they can follow and learn more about Kerim Vakfı, Stories from the 30 Birds, your book, and any other projects you might want them to know about.

Kerim: We have a Sufi centre in North Carolina, at the University of North Carolina. We have a centre in China, Beijing University, and another center in Kyoto University in Japan. And my mother’s book about the commentary of some Quranic verses is the one. For instance, Yasin is available through Amazon and my book Stories from the 30 Birds is available on Barnes and Noble and all that other places in US.

Chris: Beautiful. Well, I’ll make sure that those links are all available on the End of Tourism website and on my Substack when the episode comes out. [00:40:00] And on behalf of our listeners, tesekkur, tesekkur.

Kerim: I thank you.

Leave a comment

Subscribe now

S7 #3 | Gentrification: Intersectionality & Invisibility | Leslie Kern

Chris Christou — Wed, 18 Feb 2026 12:31:08 GMT

On this episode, my guest is Leslie Kern, PhD, the author of three books about cities, including Gentrification Is Inevitable And Other Lies and Feminist City: Claiming Space in a Man-Made World. Her work provokes new ways of thinking about and creating cities that are more just, equitable, caring, and sustainable. Leslie was an associate professor of geography and environment and women’s and gender studies at Mount Allison University from 2009-2024. Today, she is a public speaker, writer, and career coach for authors and academics.

Show Notes

Gentrification and touristification
Naturalization of gentrification
The new colonialism
Intersectionality
Who’s to blame: renter or landlord?
The hipster and the safety net
The invisible face behind gentrification and touristifcation
Transactionality or hospitality? The case of Airbnb
Commercial gentrification
The right to stay put

Homework

Leslie Kern - Website - Instagram

Gentrification Is Inevitable and Other Lies - USA - Canada

Feminist City: Claiming Space in a Man-Made World - USA - Canada

Higher Expectations: How to Survive Academia, Make it Better for Others, and Transform the University

The Tenant Class by Ricardo Tranjan

Transcript

Chris: [00:00:00] Welcome, Leslie, to the End of Tourism Podcast. Thank you for taking time out of your day, to speak with me. Thank you. To begin, I’m wondering if you’d be willing to tell us where you find yourself today and what the world looks like there, for you.

Leslie: Sure. I find myself in Cambridge, Ontario.

It’s a city of about 130,000 people. If I looked out my window right now, I would see a lot of blowing snow. It’s about minus 27 Celsius with the windchill, or something hideous like that today, so taking the time to talk to you this morning means I don’t have to go out and shovel anything just yet. So.

Chris: Well, thank you. Thank you for joining us. it’s a great honour and I’m really looking forward to this conversation that bears a great deal of complexity. So, I had invited you on the pod in part to explore your book, Gentrification is Inevitable and Other Lies. And [00:01:00] in it, Leslie, you write that

“Gentrification has come to be used as a metaphor for processes of mainstreaming, commodification, appropriation, and upscaling that are not necessarily or directly connected to cities. In this story about gentrification, gentrification stands in for any sort of change that pulls a thing or a practice out of its original context and increases its popularity, priciness, and profit-making potential.”

Given that some of our listeners might not have heard of the term “gentrification” before, although I doubt it, but given that those who have heard it might understand it also to be what you and others refer to as a “chaotic concept,” I’m wondering if you’d be willing to take a stab at defining it for us today?

Leslie: Yeah, absolutely. If we [00:02:00] look to, I guess, a kind of typical scholarly definition of gentrification, it would be describing an urban process in which middle or upper class, or in some other way, privileged households start to move into a neighbourhood or area of the city that has historically been more working class, or perhaps an immigrant neighbourhood, perhaps more industrial, and begin to remake that neighbourhood, kind of in their own image, thus driving up housing prices both in the rental and ownership markets, driving up the cost of living in the area, and critically, as part of the definition, resulting in some level of displacement of the older inhabitants of that neighbourhood. “Displacement” meaning they’ve been kind of priced out or otherwise pushed directly or indirectly to leave and [00:03:00] move to some other neighbourhood.

So, typically with gentrification, the definition is centred around it being a class-based process, but in more recent decades, many scholars, myself included, have wanted to broaden that and to acknowledge that other axes of power and privilege, for example, race, gender, ability, age, sexuality, and so on, also play a role in contributing to the kinds of forces that propel gentrification. And we can maybe get into some of that later.

So for myself, in the book, I talk about gentrification as “any kind of process of taking over claiming space and remaking it in the image and for the interests and benefit of a more powerful group of people, or perhaps even corporations, to some extent.” So, [00:04:00] gentrification is really the process of taking and claiming space. And I also do include displacement as part of that process, although I also acknowledge that sometimes people can be kind of psychologically displaced, even if they aren’t necessarily physically pushed out of their neighbourhoods.

Chris: Mean it’s something that I was noticing in Toronto before I left and moved and migrated here to Oaxaca. It’s something that I think in the last five or ten years has become an unfortunate mainstay of city life in the vast majority of places, of urban places in the world.

And this is also something that I’ve seen quite a bit here in Oaxaca, Mexico in a somewhat prolific tourist destination. And so, in places that have [00:05:00] been deemed “destinations” in this way, there’s often a kind of reductionism, here anyways, and in other tourist destinations in which gentrification and what’s sometimes called touristification is confused.

And so one definition of “touristification” is simply “the process of transformation of a place into a tourist space and its associated effects.” So a kind of very vague and broad definition. But we also understand that gentrification can happen in places that aren’t necessarily tourist destinations.

And so, we’ve also discussed in the pod the possibility that a place doesn’t necessarily need tourists in it to have touristic qualities or context what we might say. [00:06:00] And so I’m curious for you, do you think it’s important to distinguish the two concepts, gentrification and touristification? And if so, why?

Leslie: Yeah, great question. I think a distinction, to some extent, is important in that, yeah, there may be elements of touristification, for example, that are somewhat unique to that process, especially in terms of the kind of impact that it might have on local inhabitants who may not necessarily be displaced, but who may see their everyday lives kind of radically altered by the touristification of an area.

And as you say, gentrification happens in all kinds of areas, many of which are not geared to tourism, although sometimes that is a kind of later effect of gentrification, is that tourists might be drawn to certain neighbourhoods or places that they would not have otherwise gone to in the past.

As [00:07:00] you mentioned in your earlier question, there’s been some concern in the gentrification literature that it’s a bit of a chaotic concept, by which it is meant that it’s maybe too broad of an umbrella [term], and so many different kinds of processes are kind of lumped together under that umbrella. I think it’s a useful umbrella, but under that umbrella, we can try to be clear about what we’re talking about when we look at particular locations, and try to articulate the impacts that these processes are having on the local community, economy, environment, and so on.

Chris: Thank you, Leslie. Thank you for that. So your book is broken up into chapters that reveal the deeper realities behind the tropes or lies sometimes spouted about gentrification. And there are often many. And so I’m curious if after having done the research and writing for this book, and it was published in [00:08:00] 2022, so perhaps there’s been some deeper reflection in that regard, I’m curious what you feel might be the most important lie about gentrification that requires our attention and why?

Leslie: Ooh, really putting me on the hook to like pick a favorite child there. No, I’m joking. Ultimately, I mean, I guess the most straightforward answer would be the first one that I discuss in the book, which is right there in the book’s title, which is the idea that gentrification is inevitable. And we can kind of unpack that a little bit further, as I do in the kind of first main chapter of the book, which is to say that in some accounts of gentrification, it’s presented as a sort of natural process, right? As something that is just akin to evolution, for example. So there’s this idea that if you kind of start with, for example, a working class or immigrant [00:09:00] neighbourhood, lower income community, with some other kinds of attributes that might not make it seem wealthy or desirable, that over time, just through, I don’t know, a kind of mystical series of properties, the way that species evolve or human beings develop from fetus and baby to an adult through this series of difficult to trace impacts, that somehow it just happens. Right. And of course, the problem with that, again, is that if we think it’s natural, then we don’t really think there’s any way to stop it.

And also when we describe something as “natural,” we often imbue it with positive qualities. Well, if it’s “natural,” it’s just meant to happen. It’s just the way things are. And why would we want to stand in the way of that process? From a kind of political standpoint, it becomes very problematic, because it means that there’s not really a [00:10:00] willingness perhaps on the part of those who have some power and influence to slow down gentrification, to pause it, to use whatever tools they might have in their kind of legislative toolbox to create guardrails around the process happening or to try to prevent it altogether. And from a kind of community response standpoint, it can be very disempowering to believe that gentrification is inevitable, unstoppable, that once you see those first, white, middle-class families move into your neighbourhood, “boom, you’re done. It’s over. The clock is counting down to the time when it’s not your neighbourhood anymore and you’ll just have to leave, so why bother to do anything about it?”

And as I also try to show in the book, you know, it’s hard to fight gentrification, but there are examples around the world of communities that have pushed back and kind of “pumped the brakes on gentrification,” as one [00:11:00] activist described it to me. So, we, I think, don’t want to fall into this trap of believing that communities themselves are powerless, or that our politicians and policy-makers have absolutely no tools that they can use to change this.

So I would say that is probably the most important kind of first line myth or lie that we need to challenge. And then we can kind of go down the line and pick apart some of the other ones, which is how I’ve structured the book as you point out. Yeah.

Chris: Thank you, Leslie. Yeah, I mean, that was a really jarring chapter for me, in part because of this notion that not only is quote gentrification inevitable or natural, but that the city is, according to different philosophers and thinkers, imbued with this kind of biological life and [00:12:00] and that it follows as you were mentioning certain processes that are “ natural” as far as evolution is concerned.

And imediately, this brought me back to my research on what’s often referred to as 19th century social evolutionist thought, these notions that were often created or maintained by kind of, elite, wealthy, white men in the 19th century, not all of whom were academics, some of them were bankers, for example, among other things, but essentially promoting this notion that certain races or genders or types of people had evolved along the natural processes of evolution either faster than others or got ahead in certain ways, and that, of course, this was a way for those people, not only the non-academics, but those in academia [00:13:00] to employ hypotheses theories as a way of justifying colonial histories and the ongoing conquests of different people around the world. And so, in that context, I’m curious if you imagine or think that gentrification understood or described as “natural” in this way is a kind of extension, a historical extension of that kind of colonial power play of the 19th century.

Leslie: Yeah, I absolutely do. And there are many ways in which the power dynamics and even the language or the vocabulary around gentrification mirrors that around colonialism with all of the problematic tropes there of neighbourhoods or areas of the city being taken over where “there’s really nothing there,” right?

[It’s the] same kind of justification for colonialism. “There’s nothing there. [00:14:00] There’s nobody there that we need to care about,” so European colonizers are entitled to this land. Similarly, with the way that many developers, for example, I think, rationalize or justify the kind of projects they engage in.

“Oh, there’s nothing really happening in that part of the city. There’s not really a community there. It’s just a space of problems or deviation from the norm or disorder. And so we, as developers, as city planners, we’re going to bring order and light and civilization, quite frankly, to these neighbourhoods.”

So I’m sure you’re hearing in this, all those echoes around colonialism. And this point around the social evolution part of it, I think that is the kind of darker, maybe less acknowledged side of gentrification, is that when we start to talk about neighbourhoods as “nothing’s happening there, there’s nobody there.” [00:15:00] Who’s “nobody,” right? Who falls into that category of “nobody,” right? It’s poor people. It might be unhoused people, working-class people, people of colour, queer people, disabled people, sex workers, right?

“All people who we don’t really think of as kind of counting as citizens, people who we don’t think have a legitimate voice in the city, people who we don’t think have a right to the city or a claim on the city.” And they’re just seen as disposable, as easily displaceable, as not really contributing anything to the community or to the city at large. So I think there’s definitely a sense of kind of hierarchy in terms of, “who are the seemingly new people who are coming in, right?” And they’re viewed as “bringing all of these kind of gifts and benefits to the neighbourhood, and in some ways, perhaps even uplifting the poor [00:16:00] or downtrodden inhabitants of the ghetto or the barrio or whatever. And the locals should somehow be grateful to receive gentrification similarly to the way that people were, say, ‘oh, you should be grateful to receive an education if you’re from the lower-classes or working-classes.’”

So, yeah, I think there’s definitely echoes and traces of that same kind of logic, right? It’s a logic of superiority, a logic of dominance, a logic of control that resonates, whether it’s colonialism or social evolutionism. Um, yeah.

Chris: Wow. Fascinating. Fascinating stuff. I mean, this is, I think, to a large degree culture or what we call culture or what culture might be is made on the tongue, and that the, the kind of unacknowledged ways in which we speak the world into being [00:17:00] is something that’s been direly overlooked in our time. So thank you for speaking to that in that way. And I think it’s something that we would properly kind of continue to wonder about as we speak and as we think, and perhaps before we speak as well.

You know, you mentioned in there the different types of people that are often displaced as a result of gentrification. And this shows up quite a bit in your book. So I wanted to ask you about what you refer to as “intersectionality,” an intersectional approach to gentrification.

Some of the conventional critiques that you mentioned in the book, including the economic critique (kind of follow the money), the aesthetic critique (the kind of clean lines and fancy bakeries that show up), as well as the class critique, which you mentioned kind of upward mobility, among others.

That said, you focus a good portion of the book, I think, on this neglected importance of intersectionality. And so I’m curious, why do you think an intersectional approach has been ignored in the [00:18:00] past, and why might it be crucial for a cohesive or integral analysis of gentrification?

Leslie: Hmm. I think an intersectional approach has been kind of sidelined, if you will, in part because most of the key kind of prominent gentrification scholars of the late 20th century and into the 21st century have been, honestly, white men probably themselves from middle-class backgrounds, or obviously university educated scholars and they’ve been, like neo-Marxist, or Marxist. That’s their theoretical perspective. That’s their training. They come from a kind of Marxist, political economy, background. That’s the lens of analysis that they bring to whatever kind of problem they’re looking at in the world, including gentrification.

And they’ve done brilliant work, right, and created a lot of really foundational [00:19:00] concepts, gone and done really important empirical work so that we can actually see what the impacts of these processes are. And there’s nothing I want to take away from that being a key voice within the field of gentrification studies, but I think too often either there’s been kind of minimal lip service paid or kind of outright pushing to the side of feminist perspectives, anti-racist perspective, anti-colonial perspectives and more, because it’s sort of seemed like, well, “class is the main driver and anything that maybe disproportionately impacts women or people of colour, or queer folks or elderly people, that’s like a side effect, right? Like the main driver is class and those people are simply impacted because they also happen to fall into lower income brackets.”

So it’s a pretty neat and tidy [00:20:00] story and you can kind of see why it has some appeal. So I think, you know, those political economy, neo-Marxist scholars is not that they don’t care about race or gender or other factors. They’re just like, “well, it’s all really rolled up under the umbrella of ‘class.’ And if we just figure out the ‘class’ piece, then those other things will kind of fall into place.” But for feminist scholars, critical race scholars, anti-colonial scholars and so on, they’ve wanted to point out that assuming that class is the primary driver behind things is maybe an assumption that we’ve held onto for too long without questioning it. And instead of seeing racial impacts and so on as something that’s just happening off to the side through a class process, maybe we want to also look, especially in something like an American context, but in other places as well, at the deeply foundational layer of race to the development of cities, to the development of the [00:21:00] nation, and we can’t kind of sideline the impacts of racial discrimination and the kind of hierarchy of race that has developed over many centuries in these locations and say, “oh, well it’s a secondary factor.”

For myself, I’m a feminist scholar. My background is in women’s and gender studies before I kind of accidentally stumbled into being an urban geographer. And to me it was always kind of obvious, but I think I’ve had to argue this point so often that processes like gentrification, neoliberalism, urban revitalization, as it’s called, doesn’t just kind of impact women as a tangential side effect, but that gender inequality or assumptions about gender roles and so on are like part of what drives the process. And so I try to bring that out in the book by looking at different kinds of examples of the ways in which different sorts of [00:22:00] communities or people are impacted to hopefully show, to hopefully make a case for this idea that taking an intersectional perspective doesn’t deny the class factor at all, but that it allows us to look at gentrification through a more nuanced lens and one that respects the fact that class is not the only, and not always the most salient marker of hierarchy and status in our societies.

Chris: Hmm, hmm. Yeah, I did go to university a long time ago, and it seemed that what was offered up on the proverbial, kind of conceptual, bill, politically speaking was, here are your five major theories or perspectives and kind of like choose one and decide what you like the best and then argue for it or against it.

But it does seem that the more apertures that we have onto the world, without necessarily needing [00:23:00] to collapse our considerations into a single one can broaden our understanding of the world deeply, right? Deeply, deeply. And it’s something that I see anyways less and less of.

I think there’s more and more possibilities for experiencing that in our time, but I think there’s a lot of processes that are happening in which there’s less and less of it that’s actually occurring - a kind of collapse of maybe ontological diversity or philosophical diversity.

I don’t know what to call it, but seems prevalent and at least from this little aperture. So.

Leslie: Yeah, I would agree with that, as someone who, just in my own little brief lifetime here on this earth has been peddling my little feminist arguments for 30-plus years. And then we add on to that, the 30 years before that and 30 years before all of the previous generations. It seems like we are, [00:24:00] not just from a feminist perspective, but we are kind of constantly having to make these arguments for that ontological diversity, as you put it, or even just the idea that, oh, you can view things through different lenses and learn different things about whatever kind of process or force or issue that you’re interested in.

Chris: Hmm. Well, thank you for that. I’d like to, if I can, Leslie, there was something I’ve been wrestling with for a while and it was very much front and centre, this kind of inner wrestling when I was reading your book.

And so, I’d like to share that with you at the moment if I can, and we’ll see where it takes us. So part of the reason that I left Toronto a decade ago was that the housing crises, that perhaps for some wasn’t yet a crisis in Toronto, has of course ballooned. But in the past five years I’ve watched that same housing crisis play out here in Oaxaca.

[00:25:00] And what arose almost immediately in the, we’ll say media sphere, the online world and certainly on the streets as well, was a kind of xenophobic campaign or campaigns blaming tourists, digital nomads, and “expats” for the rising cost of rentals and housing. Now, while not entirely misguided, the percentage of such people is insignificant in comparison to the total population of renters and homeowners here.

And then I ask myself, well, “why isn’t anyone questioning the role of homeowners and landlords, those who actually decide the price of rental units, those who decide to turn long-term rentals into Airbnbs, and those who are, some of them anyways, more often than not, part and parcel of the political ruling class in many places?” Why not blame them?

And so, if you think about this enough, you can [00:26:00] begin to imagine that the willingness to blame specific people, types, classes, races, et cetera, can ignore the cultural, economic and structural elements of society that allow and encourage such dynamics to emerge. And it seems to me that you speak to this, to some degree, in your book writing, how

“it is not helpful in a critique of gentrification to get overly stuck on the styles and preferences of a group, when, for many decades now, gentrification has been propelled by much stronger forces than aesthetic trends.”

And in another part of the book, you write that “cultural factors cannot be hastily dismissed, not when their power is easily co-opted by capital. Trends in denim and facial hair are not responsible for gentrification, but when large groups of people are redefined as a class based on their tastes, occupations, and aesthetics, they become a market and a justification for urban [00:27:00] interventions.”

And so my question has to do with what I might call, I don’t know if this is something that shows up in your work or in your research, but a kind of “ecological analysis,” one that doesn’t necessarily separate people into essentialist categories, but contends with how maybe the rules of the game produce the player’s behaviour and beliefs.

And so I’m wondering, you know, in your research, is that something that is tended to, a way of, “okay so, we’re not going to only blame or ask the tourists to take responsibility or the digital nomads, et cetera, and we’re not only gonna blame or ask the landlords to take responsibility, but understand that they live and inhabit a kind of web of relations that has, for a long time, created the context that allows them or even [00:28:00] encourages them to proceed in a particular way?

Leslie: Yes, a hundred percent. I really love the way that you put that there and giving it that kind of label of like an ecological perspective there. I think it’s so important to do in the book. You know, the first quote that you read there, I think has to do with this idea that, “oh, you know, hipsters were causing gentrification” kind of thing.

And I wanted to kind of, not defend the hipster per se, but to just say, well, in a city like New York, for example, the takeover of midtown Manhattan and the absolute sort of pricing out of regular people, well, from Manhattan as a whole in many cases is not to do with artists and yoga teachers moving into those neighborhoods. It has to do with massive multinational corporations buying up housing, developing condos, like all of these other things that [00:29:00] are going on. And as you say, I mean, I think it is useful to question and critique landlordism for example, and even home ownership itself, but there’s a reason why people engage in these practices and as you say, it’s because of these all sorts of other like prior sort of conditions and causes this kind of web of possibilities that so much of our... the policy, the legislative world, our national context shapes for us.

Like in Canada for example, home ownership is, as you well know, sort of seen as the ultimate goal in the housing market. Renting is seen as very much a kind of transitional stage for people. And the idea is to eventually, sooner rather than later, own your own home.

And of course there’s all kinds of cultural myths around that, of homeowners being like responsible people and better citizens and all this kind of stuff that is, maybe like [00:30:00] largely nonsense. But why, in this context, do people become homeowners? Well, this is the way that we’ve been told “you secure your retirement in the absence of a truly kind of robust old age security net.” Yes, we have some. We have pension, old age pension, but for many people, the home is ultimately their social safety net, and government policy has very much been set up to encourage us to treat our homes in that way and to rely on paying off a mortgage and having that home to be the basis of survival into our old age.

Right. And there are many other things. That’s just one example. So I think, as you say, it’s really important to kind of look at that whole ecosystem. And that doesn’t mean that we don’t say, “well, okay, what are homeowners doing that might be potentially problematic and contributing to the problem?”

Well, that could include things like turning units into Airbnbs or acting in NIMBY-ish (Not In My Backyard), kind of ways that limit, for example, the amount of affordable housing that might go up in their neighbourhood and other things. Of course, all of those dynamics have to be critiqued, challenged, pushed back against. But, keeping, at the same time that kind of zoomed out perspective of like what’s going on on a larger scale, in the kind of corporate and investment world and the government policy-making world, I think at least helps us to understand why these different groups are kind of positioned in the way that they do and the kind of range of possibilities that they see for themselves within that web.

Chris: Mm mm Yeah. Yeah. That reminds me of a moment that I had here in Oaxaca, maybe three or four years ago. There was a student group that had come down from a Canadian university, and they were here for a couple weeks, and I was having dinner with them. Not all of them, but there was maybe four of the women from the student group that I was having dinner with.

And one of them was probably in her, I would say [00:32:00] mid-fifties, an indigenous woman from Ontario. And the other three were much younger, probably in their early twenties. And they were suddenly talking about the sudden or at least recent kind of housing crisis in their university town, we’ll call it, maybe a small city, but big town. And how in previous years they could afford the rent, but suddenly, and of course this was 2021-2022, when a lot of these dynamics started changing extremely rapidly. And I was kind of moderating the conversation at first. And then it turned out, she wasn’t so quick to out herself as a landlord. But the indigenous woman, the 55-year-old kind of alluded to it and then said, “well, you know, for a lot of people, it’s a pension plan. “It’s my retirement plan, essentially.” And it was this really interesting dynamic about how these four women, who had come to this place and were in the same program, studying the [00:33:00] same thing, that one of them had to perhaps, unbeknownst to her, undermine the economic life and possibilities of those younger women by virtue of requiring a retirement plan.

Right. And I think at least in Canada, in countries that are very much still welfare states, that it speaks to a, the incredible degree in which the care that’s offered, especially to the elderly, is almost entirely top-down. There’s so little, if any, community care.

And, you know, of course this is a very kind of small example, a very kind of minute example. I think maybe a common one. But of course you also have other examples of, as you mentioned before, corporations... is it BlackRock this massive mutual fund that I know in, in Europe and places like Barcelona and the major cities there end up buying entire apartment buildings or blocks even, and evicting [00:34:00] the residents and then setting up Airbnb buildings, essentially. So, I mean, there’s this incredible kind of degree of difference and diversity in terms of how, as you mentioned landlordism and rent is affecting people.

But I just wanted to mention that. It was a really kind of interesting moment for me to see this dynamic and the young women kind of complaining about, you know, I guess the future, the present and the future of their economic lives. And then, this older woman also not necessarily complaining, but very much concerned about her ability to live as well, economically and to thrive economically into her older age.

Leslie: Yeah. And there’s these kind of ironic situations popping up all over the place where so for example, someone might have a public pension. And as you point out, many public pensions are deeply invested in real estate income trusts. This is like a huge piece for example, in Ontario, of [00:35:00] Ontario public workers’ pensions, but around the world as well, and I don’t have the details, but a story that was in the news several years ago about a man somewhere in Europe who was being evicted from his apartment because that one of these real estate investment corporations was taking it over and was gonna redevelop it in some way. But his public pension was invested in that very same company. Right?

So many people are kind of caught in these loops where it’s like, we would very much like to not be like, displacing ourselves or our neighbours or community members, but we don’t necessarily have control over how our pension funds are invested, right? Like you might have a choice like, “oh, I’d like to divest from fossil fuels, for example, or from tobacco or military, like arms deals.” Like, sometimes, you can opt out of those things in your pension funds, but there’s not really a way to like opt out of real estate investment.

It’s such a huge part of those things now. So I think that’s an area where there’s increasing kind of research and critical perspectives on that in gentrification scholarship and so on that I think is really important to look at, because it’s also very hidden, right? This is another aspect I think of contemporary kind of gentrification touristification even, is that there’s no face to it, right? There’s no face to this process. And maybe that’s why it’s tempting to take, as you put it a minute ago, that kind of like xenophobic perspective or to blame “expats” in the case of Oaxaca and touristification or in cities to be like, “oh, it’s these urban hipsters, maybe these like trust fund kids” or whatever label people might want to put on someone, because there’s a face, right? There you can look and be like, “that’s the problem.” But the reality is there is no face, right? There’s no individual or even group of individuals that’s easy to identify. And people doing [00:37:00] research into some of this pension fund stuff that I’m talking about, they hit very opaque walls, even just trying to get the information about how these companies work, the kinds of decisions they make, what their rubrics are around what they call “socially responsible investing.”

So it’s very deliberately mystified and hidden from us, and I think that is part of the challenge now is like, how do you fight this monster that you can’t see, that you can barely name?

So yeah, that is I think one of the kind of frightening things, if you will, about, whether we call it “gentrification,” or we think about it in this broader sense of the housing crisis, who’s the face of that, the cause of that crisis? Very hard to say in many cases.

Chris: Wow. Yeah, I know that these mutual fund companies that end up buying, you know, whole city blocks or buildings, apartment buildings, and then tending to renovictions or whatever they [00:38:00] might use in order to get people out. Once the buildings are “ renovated” as Airbnbs, what happens is those corporations end up outsourcing all of the operational and cleaning duties to companies that they’re not involved with at all. So, again, you could have this person who’s in front of you, who might be a cleaner or who comes ou in and out of the building or who might run the reservation books or something like that, but they’ve never met anyone from that mutual fund company. Right. They just get a paycheck.

Leslie: Yeah. And it’s happening on this kind of global level. The people behind the company that’s investing in that building in Oaxaca, like they may have never set foot there, and they may never set foot there. Right? So it’s happening from around the world, from thousands of kilometers away from behind these kind of screens of, as you said, these kind of shell companies and these subcontracted, property management companies.

I mean the story you were just telling about the woman who’s a landlord, like on that small scale, not that [00:39:00] there’s nothing problematic about it, but it is also like, you know, she’s probably met her tenants, right? She probably occasionally sets foot in the property that she owns and that she rents out, and there’s like some aspect of a relationship there. It’s still, you know, a problematic power dynamic and all of that, but it’s on a very different scale than the investor from London who’s has a stake in a condo in Oaxaca. Like, it’s a very different web of of relations that goes into that.

Chris: Yeah. And even if someone like that, and I’ve had many, many landlords over the years and I’ve been blessed to have a number of them who are really incredible people and really incredible in terms of showing up when they’re needed in that regard. But it’s something, I discussed on a previous episode regarding the Airbnb-ization of the world, a couple years ago. And one of the themes that came up was around hospitality, right? [00:40:00] And even if you have people who are kind of really engaged and really excited and responsible about having a tenant in their home or in a particular building, the kind of transactional nature of that rent almost (and then of course the history of it) precludes, almost by default, the possibility of there being a kind of host-guest relationship, right? Instead of that we are “clients” and and, and “salespeople,” businesspeople to some degree.

Right. So another layer of it is this question of like, “well, is it even possible within the dynamic or structure that renting implies and incurs, is it even possible to create a dynamic wherein a person can be understood as a guest in another person’s home, and another person can be understood as a host to people who are coming to live in their home? Right? That that same [00:41:00] woman, the 55-year-old landlord said that she had tenants who refused to leave for, I dunno, a year and a half or two years, and once they finally did, left her with a $40,000 damage bill. So, I think there’s just layers and layers that are extremely difficult to kind of get into, I shouldn’t say in terms of dialogue, in terms of investigation, but in terms of the possibility of creating different dynamics that would maybe represent or produce the kinds of dynamics and worlds that, I think, a lot of people would want to live in.

Leslie: Yeah, I totally agree. I mean, I think in a lot of cases, and you honestly don’t have to dig very deep, you can open up CBC News and see some poor, sad landlord story most days of the week or listen to kind of corporate or larger scale landlords talk and they often see tenants as a nuisance.

“The tenants themselves are a problem,” and if they could invest in real estate and still make [00:42:00] these returns without actually having tenants, that would probably be ideal. And I think that is also part of the push to an Airbnb is that with a temporary guest, you know, a week, a weekend or whatever, you don’t have the same responsibility to them as you do to someone with a year lease or perhaps the right to stay there for a longer period of time. So, all you have to do is kind of provide this very basic amenity of the space. You can even impose all these rules on them that you maybe otherwise wouldn’t be able to do if it was a longer-term rental.

You know, the people who check-in have many fewer rights than actual tenants do. And so in some ways it makes that relationship even more transactional and even more hands off in many cases. And of course there’s the quicker profit motive is really the main driving force behind that. But I think there’s also this piece of it where it’s like, “well, how can I maximize the profit potential of this space with as little actually dealing with other human beings and their needs [00:43:00] as human beings as possible.

And yeah, I think that is really, again, from my kind of feminist perspective, that is also interested in thinking about how do we create systems of care in our cities, and what does “care” mean, and what are our responsibilities to one another that, when we look at something like Airbnbification and the touristification and gentrification more generally, those things, in many cases kind of act against the possibility of creating more caring and careful spaces.

Chris: Hmm, hmm. Yeah. Thank you for that, Leslie. I have a couple more questions for you, if that’s all right?

Leslie: Yes, go ahead. Yeah.

Chris: All right. Wonderful. So this next question maybe requires a bit of imagination, which I think you have a good amount of, and it has to do with rent.

And so one of the lies that you highlight in your book is the belief that gentrification is natural and hence forth inevitable. [00:44:00] And of course, as we’ve been discussing, nothing is natural nor inevitable and you make an excellent case for that throughout the book. And I feel that there is an equally and perhaps more subtle incarnation of this myth, of this inevitability, in regards to rent, that we as urban people or modern people who grow up in contemporary societies often reinforce and even naturalize a kind of rent slavery that most people rarely see, that most people rarely see their lives as indentured to their landlords.

And so, when we talk about gentrification, does this show up at all? Should it? You know, this notion that, “well, if we can come to gentrification and understand that it’s in fact not natural and it’s not inevitable, can we do the same thing for rent? Because, maybe I haven’t read much of the research, but it doesn’t seem to be something that [00:45:00] people are so quick to aim their arrows at, we’ll say.

Leslie: Yeah. I love that question. And I think A, you’re right that there hasn’t been enough conversation about that. There has not been nearly enough attempts to kind of denaturalize this and B, that that perspective is emerging and growing. If I could recommend a book called The Tenant Class by Ricardo Tranjan. It’s also a Toronto-based author, and he does an amazing job in this very short book of basically laying out the case against landlordism, and it totally, as you say, kind of denaturalizing and pushes back on this idea that it’s inevitable that there are a class of people that own property and a class of people that rent property, and that this is not inherently a deeply problematic relation. You know, this idea that it’s not in some way akin to some kind of indentureship. And he really asks us to look deeply again at this [00:46:00] idea that, if you’re a landlord, “well, I have a mortgage to pay, so it’s somehow natural that this other person will pay my mortgage for me,” which, when you start to think about it, like it’s really messed up in a way. And once you see it, you can’t unsee it. So yeah, I think looking more closely at some of these ideas, these kind of statements that come out, and again, you can see it in news articles, these kind of horror stories, and not to diminish, I’m sure, what are very real, like economic and psychological impacts of the so-called kind of nightmare tenant and all of those kinds of things.

But you’ll hear those kinds of statements: “you know, I have a mortgage to pay.”

Well, why is this other person paying your mortgage, then?

And then we could probably take a step back and be like, “why do we have mortgages to pay?” But that’s maybe another conversation.

But yeah, so I definitely recommend that book, The Tenant Class, as a really quick, easy to read, and kind of unforgettable primer on this question. And [00:47:00] I really appreciate you asking it, and I hope your listeners will be like, “oh, yeah, I gotta dig into that a bit more too.”

Chris: Yeah.

Yeah. I mean, you know, in part because, as prices have risen in most western countries in the last four or five years, there’s of course, of course, protests and backlash among people, and “oh, this bakery raised their prices” or “ my rent’s going up,” and all these things. But specifically in terms of products and services, you know, people complain or they just accept the fact that prices have risen to a degree that’s pricing a lot of people out of their lives, really. But, you know, in the conversations I’ve had with people and in the literature that I’ve read, there’s no consideration, I think, that the businesses who are raising their prices have had their rents raised, that so much of a business’ costs include rent, right? And that very few businesses actually [00:48:00] own the building that they’re working out of.

Leslie: Yeah, commercial rent is a whole other story because, you know, the protections on residential rent are not what they could be in most places around the world, but there’s no protections on commercial rent, like no limitations there. So it’s entirely possible that local bakery, their rent could go up by, like double. It could go up from $20,000 a year to $60,000 a year. There’s no restrictions on that. There’s nowhere to appeal that. There’s nothing. So, they are, in some ways, even those small businesses, especially, independent businesses and so on, are very at risk of this. And there’s a whole branch of kind of retail gentrification studies as well that kind of looks at the impacts on the local economic landscape of things like this as well. Yeah.

Chris: Hmm. Wow. Thank you for unveiling that for us. I mean, uh, so much.

So my last question, Leslie, has to do [00:49:00] with what is mentioned in your book, what you refer to as “the right to stay put.”

And so,

“the right to stay put is a common rallying cry in response to the dangers of displacement. Drawing inspiration from the broader notion of the right to the city, the right to stay put insists that communities are entitled to remain in the places they have contributed to. Furthermore, the right to dwell extends beyond simply having a home in an area, encompassing the right to continue using commercial, community, and public spaces and institutions, as well as the dignity of defending such rights. Importantly, it recognizes that agency is a critical factor. People do not want to be forced to move, nor do they want to be forced to stay in place. Rather, people value choice, the ability to participate in [00:50:00] decisions that affect their communities and the right to resist when they need to.”

And so I’m curious what you think it would take for people, say, in urban environments to achieve or enshrine the right to stay put or the right to dwell in their places.

Leslie: Yeah, I think we could talk about kind of two main avenues. One would be more of the top-down approach, which is to work to enshrine anti-displacement measures in neighborhoods, which can include everything from rent control or rent stabilization, to the right to return when there are redevelopment projects going on, to deeply affordable housing in new developments, to communities themselves taking on the role of becoming developers, but creating housing within the community for the [00:51:00] community. Not to draw in new residents or not to primarily draw new residents. Again, we’re not trying to like, build a fortress around communities or anything, but rather to say, “this is housing that we’re earmarking for people from the local community who are struggling with their rent or struggling to find housing, or who need perhaps entry-level home ownership opportunities and to kind of provide that.

So there’s the kind of top-down approach, really pushing our local governments to have things like community benefit ordinances when new developments are happening that force developers to actually pay attention to what the community needs and to provide those benefits and such.

And then, from the kind of ground-up or more grassroots piece, the right to stay put is the the willingness, the ability to organize and come together in some of the places that I mentioned throughout the book. You know, it really [00:52:00] is community-level organization where people have really rallied to make it deeply difficult for planners or developers to kind of roll in and roll out their vision without any pushbacks, to the extent that their neighbourhoods become less of a target for gentrification, because it’s like, “oh yeah, we wanna build something there. Oh, that’s gonna be a real pain in the butt. The community is not gonna let us get away with what we wanna do.” And that means really making it possible for people to come out to meetings, organizing protests, that kind of right to resist. Sometimes taking... You know, we have long histories in many cities of squatters movements and perhaps we need to revitalize some of that old energy, as well. A kind of refusal to leave. And to find ways, you know, perhaps they don’t always have to be kind of in-your-face protest ways, but what are ways to mobilize things like mutual aid to help make sure that our [00:53:00] neighbors are supported, for example, if they have to go before a landlord-tenant board, how can we use community resources and knowledge to actually support one another to stay in place?

And that can be everything from addressing food insecurity to having a local rent bank, to partnering with nonprofits, churches, other religious institutions that may have an interest in building social and nonprofit housing to create some of those options.

So I think it’s about looking at the kind of wide range of alternative forms of housing and housing provision, looking at community mobilizing, community resources, and also tackling the local policy agenda to make staying put as possible, or to enshrine it as a right at a kind of higher level, as well.

Chris: Hmm, hmm. Yeah, you go into [00:54:00] great detail about this in the book, and I’m very grateful for that. And the right to stay put kind of jumped out, the text jumped out of the page at me, because living here in Oaxaca, I came to know about this declaration that was created in 2009 by people in a number of communities here in the Mixteca region of Oaxaca who were meeting with their migrant kin who had gone to work in California and the people who had stayed in the community.

And the declaration is literally translated as “the right to not migrate.” The way it was translated in English by the author of the book of the same name, was “The Right to Stay Home.” And so while there’s a lot of differences between these contexts in terms of rural, indigenous communities here in Mexico and modern urban communities in the global north, there is this sense, [00:55:00] this kind of perhaps shared context wherein the ability to to stay in a place in order so that community can be conjured and maintained and of course enjoyed and lived in, seems to thread its way through these different social movements from the global north into the global south.

So, I’m really grateful to see that and to know that there’s similar understandings, of course not the same, but similar understandings that are even somewhat unorthodox and unexpected given the political context that sometimes challenge them or preclude something like that from coming up.

So that’s a little way of saying thank you for your time today, Leslie. On behalf of our listeners, I’d like to thank you for your willingness to join me and to speak to these often complex issues. And on behalf of them, I’d also like to ask you how they might find out more about [00:56:00] your work and your books: Gentrification Is Inevitable And Other Lies, Feminist City: Claiming Space In A Manmade World, and finally Higher Expectations: How To Survive Academia, Make It Better For Others, And Transform The University.

Leslie: Yeah, thank you so much for this conversation. People can find out about me and my work at my website, which is just lesliekern.ca.

If you just google my name, it will come up easily enough. Feminist City and Gentrification Is Inevitable And Other Lies. For an international audience, you can find those books through Verso books in the US and UK. There’s also many translations of both of those books, so you may have the opportunity to read it in your local language if you want to do that as well.

The more recent book, Higher Expectations is available from my Canadian publisher Between the Lines Books and in the US [00:57:00] from AK Books, as well. And there’s also Epub versions and for the first two books, audiobook versions as well. And I’ve written lots of articles on these topics as well, in the Guardian and other places.

So you can get a little snippet of my thoughts if you, again, Google my name and all of these things will come up in short order. So thank you for letting me share that as well.

Chris: Yeah, of course. I’ll make sure that the links to all those pages that you mentioned are available on the End of Tourism website and the Substack when the episode launches.

And once again, Leslie, a really beautifully revealing conversation today. I think it’s something that will not just provoke generally, but provoke a willingness in our listeners to reconsider some of the assumptions that they’ve had about gentrification.

So, once again, thank you for your time today.

Leslie: Thank you for having me. I really enjoyed the conversation. Appreciate it.

Leave a comment

Subscribe now

S7 #2 | Animism, Healing and Psychedelic Tourism | Adam Aronovich (Healing From Healing)

Chris Christou — Wed, 21 Jan 2026 11:03:16 GMT

On this episode, my guest is . Adam has a PhD in Anthropology and Communications and is an active member of the Medical Anthropology Research Center (MARC-URV). A long-term student and researcher of various magico-medical systems around the world, he has facilitated workshops and retreats in the Amazon rainforest and the Mexican coast for almost a decade. He is the co-founder of Hidden Hand Media, a creative agency at the intersection of psychedelia, technology, and society, and the creator of Healing from Healing, a social media platform that casts a critical, skeptical, and humorous gaze at Healing and Transformation Culture.

Show Notes

Adam’s doctoral thesis and time in the Amazon
Iatrogenesis and Healing Culture
Epistemic Humility
Our Traumadelic Stories
Clash in Understandings of Causation
Disneyfication of Plant Medicine
Individual vs Relational Healing
Psychedelic Tourism’s Local Consequences
Spirit Realm Fallout
Animistic Perspective
Narrative, Cults, and Conspirituality

Homework

Adam Aronovich - Substack - Instagram: Healing From Healing

Adam’s Doctoral Thesis: Mother Ayahuasca Told Me: Writings at the Heart of Contemporary Healing Culture

Martin Buber - I and Thou

Thomas Berry

Traumadelic Culture

Transcript

Chris: Welcome to the End of Tourism Podcast, Adam. Thanks so much for being willing to speak with me today.

Adam: Oh no, my pleasure.

Chris: Hmm. So, to begin, Adam, maybe you could share with us where you find yourself today and what the world looks like where you are.

Adam: That’s a simple question, usually maybe with simpler answers, but right now, kind of the last year or two, I’ve been bouncing back and forth between Nayarit in Mexico and Los Angeles. So right now, I’m in LA for the next month or so, and then I’m back in Nayarit for a little bit. But right now, in Los Angeles.

Chris: Well, welcome this morning and I know you mentioned to me that you recently defended your PhD thesis, and I’d like to congratulate you on that alone. It’s a huge accomplishment. And I guess, you know, before we get into my questions, I’d like to ask you if there’s anything in terms of that you’d like to offer us a little glimpse of in terms of what you’ve been tending to and perhaps even slaving over, over the last few years or more?

Adam: Yeah, thank you. Basically, I wrote an ethnography. I mean, my field is medical anthropology, so I did, I wrote kind of a classical ethnography. I mean, it blends a few different genres within anthropological literature.

So, it has some aspects of classical ethnography, which is kind of a little like a travelogue, an observation of certain phenomena that I met on my path, a little bit of critical ethnography, problematizing the field with some context, with theoretical context. But I think like the most important thing for me was also bringing kind of the literary side of it. So, my goal from the beginning was to make something that was readable and enjoyable. Those were kind of like the two parameters.

You know, when I was writing the, the text kind, I constantly just kept thinking about what kind of public I wanted to appeal to. And you know, it is kind of an academic text, but also something that I hope that people can enjoy just for its literary merits. So, it kind of draws from that tradition of ethnographic literature that it’s also enjoyable and pleasurable and interesting. And I mean at least that was what I was aiming for. I don’t know if I succeeded. That’s not for me to judge, obviously that’s for the readers. And yeah, I mean, right now, the thesis is defended and everything is fine. And then, I guess the next step would be to find a publisher and an editor. It shouldn’t be a problem. I mean, it’s still an academic text, so to be publishable as a book for a wider audience, it still would need to be edited to some extent. But yeah, I mean that’s where it’s at.

And I mean that the whole text kind of draws from the years that I spent in Peru, in the Amazon Rainforest. I was working at an ayahuasca retreat centre in Peru for few years and observing and participating and trying to write an account of what it is that people from the Global North speak when they speak about medicine, when they speak about healing, when they speak about spiritual transformation. What is the world of meaning that we draw from? What are the things that we get from it? And, you know, what is the impact of all of that in the social envelope, in the cultural context in which it all happens? And I guess kind of trying to give a different perspective that is not necessarily just hype.

I think there’s a lot of hype in server surrounding psychedelics and psychedelic plant medicines in the so-called psychedelic renaissance. But I think, you know, you spend enough time in in the Amazon rainforest and you notice that things are more complex and there’s much more nuance, and there’s important things that need to be unpacked and problematized to some extent. So, you know, one of the goals was that he doesn’t read kind of like, as a pamphlet, just to like advertise the ayahuasca industry on one hand, but at the same time, also not to completely bash it, right?

Like, it was like trying to find a middle way, highlighting both the beautiful, but also the problematic, and kind of like trying to give a complete picture of the hope, the hype, the fervour, and also the darker sides of the whole enterprise.

So, yeah, I mean, it’s available. If anybody’s interested, they can reach out.

Chris: Oh, wonderful.

Adam: Yeah.

Chris: Yeah. Well, congratulations on that. I mean, it sounds like, not just a lot of hard work, but really important work. And that’s in large part why you’ve been invited to speak with me today. there’s very few voices I think in the psychedelic subculture who are willing to take it to task, to do so in a way that honours the kinds of worlds that we’d like to live in and still recognizes the fault lines that we’ve created here in our time.

And so, I’d like to begin, I guess, creating a bit of context for our listeners in terms of a couple terms that sometimes show up in your writing and in your interviews. You know, I was elated when first reading your work, especially in the context of psychedelics to read the word “iatrogenic,” which I think was popularized by the philosopher Ivan Illich in the latter-half of the 20th century. And so I’m wondering if you could offer our listeners just a brief foray into “iatrogenesis” and why you think we might apply it to an analysis of psychedelic or healing culture.

Adam: Yeah. Well, I think in the most, simple term, “iatrogenic” basically means something that is caused by the medical intervention, right? So the iatrogenesis kind of would be, for example, a disease of an illness that is originated or caused by the medical intervention itself. So it’s a term that is oftentimes used to critique certain aspects of medical practice that are perceived to cause more harm than to heal or cure.

And you know, when applied to the psychedelic industry, I think iatrogenesis is something that is very important to understand because, of course, the promise of psychedelics is huge, while the potential risks and damage they can do to a person and also not negligible. And I think it’s something that oftentimes get overlooked.

I think in the last few years there’s been a lot of people that have made it a point to kind of highlight the actual dangers and risks of psychedelic practice, including the iatrogenic component of bad facilitation, for example or bad providers. Or not necessarily bad, like in an ontological way like unskilled or lacking experience or lacking a wide enough repertoire of epistemic frameworks to help people kind of like sense-make and meaning-make their experiences, which is I think something that for me is very important, and something that I focus a lot on, right? Like what kind of epistemic tools we’re providing for people to make sense of experiences that are inherently, oftentimes rocking the foundations of our epistemologies and ontologies, which is something that again not many facilitators are well equipped to deal with, particularly when we’re talking about, let’s say, ayahuasca in a traditional context, where the ontologies from which these medicines originate and feed from are extremely different to the worldviews and ways of understanding ourselves in the world that we’re accustomed to.

So, you know, we’re talking about the iatrogenic harm, I think. I talk about the role that facilitators, providers, supporting staff and cast have, in ensuring not only that the experience falls properly, but also again, just not causing harm, or avoiding risk and damage as much as we can, which is something, again, it’s something that we’re learning along the way, collectively, as this practice has become more globalized and more popularized.

Chris: Thank you for that. And there’s another term that you use, as well among, but almost as a kind of antidote, I think to iatrogenesis, which is “epistemic humility.” And on your Healing From Healing Instagram page, there’s a small post about it in which you write that

“Epistemic humility is an intellectual virtue. It is grounded in the realization that our knowledge is always provisional and incomplete, and that it might require revision in the light of new evidence.”

Now, I imagine you wouldn’t have posted this on an account dedicated to psychedelic healing culture if you thought that epistemic humility was already prevalent there. So my question is, where do you think the lack of epistemic humility among modern people comes from, and why might it be crucial for those in psychedelic or healing cultures?

Adam: These are complex, complex things. I mean, I can give my opinion, which is informed by my observations and my experience in these environments.

I think psychedelics are remarkable for many things. They’re remarkable in a variety of different ways, and one of the ways I think that they’re particularly remarkable, is you know, kind of like helping people widen or reconfigure our capacity to process information, to make sense of the world around us, to consider knowledge, how we acquire knowledge, how we make sense of that knowledge, and how we form belief systems based on that knowledge or how we form models of how the world works, you know, and what our place in the world is like.

I think psychedelics are very apt for allowing people to, at the very least, ask questions related to those domains of epistemology, ontology, and so on. At the same time, I think, for example, if a person Google goes on a psychedelic experience is very powerful and then that experience kind of catalyzes this process of deconstruction of our models of the world and what the world is like, and so and so forth, which happens quite often, then there is an interval in that person’s life of heightened vulnerability, in terms of what other models of the world are available, right? This is a moment where a person can very easily have their epistemology hijacked by, you know, malware. Let’s just call it “epistemic malware.”

Whereas the model of the world that they had prior to it maybe starts dissolving. But then, instead of kind of like staying in that space of uncertainty and non-determination, then it’s easy to kind of gravitate towards some other model that just provides easy answers. And then we get into the domain of conspiracy theory, for example, or conspirituality which is one of the words that became popular in the last five or six years since the pandemic, right? Like this intersection of conspiracy culture, conspiracy epistemics, and western self spirituality that. It is just kind of like this conjunction of conspiracy culture and self spirituality that is really at the heart of much of the contemporary transformation culture, right?

Like all this scene that I call really “healing culture.” I mean the hyper object that I use to kind of think about this thing is “healing culture,” which includes within it, you know, fragments of conspiracy culture, of New Age spirituality but mostly focused on self spirituality

I mean, I don’t know if it’s a religious movement, but it’s the kind of spirituality that really sacralizes the self over everything else, right? Like, I mean, “we’re our own Gods and Goddesses,” like “everything can be found inside,” “all the knowledge and wisdom that we need is already inside of us,” and so on and so forth.

And there are other aspects of healing culture. But so, this moment of epistemic vulnerability, when our epistemologies and our ontologies kind of get shaken or deconstructed is a moment where we’re very vulnerable to them being influenced, or being fed some other story that is not necessarily in our best interest, either.

And I think, facilitators (for example) or integration coaches or medicine providers, any person that is really working with psychedelics, I think there is a huge responsibility in terms of that epistemic vulnerability of the person, Like being super hyper-aware of what kind of stories we are reproducing, what kind of ideologies, what kind of spiritual precepts, what kind of belief systems we carry with us that then get maybe projected into somebody that is in a very vulnerable state.

And I think epistemic humility, to that extent, functions as a sort of cushion or sort of antidote. Like, “Hey, you know, like we don’t have to hurry to attach to beliefs quickly. we don’t have to attach, we don’t have to hurry to leap, to make a leap of faith into another belief system that requires from us that certainty.

I think for me at least when I’m working for myself or when I’m working with other people, I think one of the places where I feel most comfortable is actually in that indeterminacy of allowing myself and encouraging other people to feel comfortable with not knowing, with not making a choice, with the uncertainty of not having to put a finger on like, “oh this is exactly how the world works, this is exactly who is in charge, this is the structure of the new model of the world that I have.”

But rather like, “Hey, you know, like maybe let’s consider that there’s complexity, there’s a lot of nuance to these things.

In that moment, for example, when that epistemic kind of deconstruction happens, the person has choices. So on one choice, we can say “well, I want to learn more about the political economy of drugs,” or “I want to learn more about sociology,” “I want to learn more about the history of governance,” “I want to learn more about how the economic system actually works and how finance works,” and so on, which takes a lot of time, takes a lot of effort, is a lifelong endeavour of trying to understand more and more and more about society and about culture and about politics to gain a wider understanding, a more precise model of how the world actually works.

Or on the other hand, we can say like, “fuck that, that’s too complex. Okay, it’s easier for me to just say ‘oh no, it’s actually the Jews or the Masons, or there’s actually like this huge conspiracy or a handful of people that are in charge of everything that happens. And then, I’m going to attach to that worldview, because it provides me a sense of certainty.”

It’s to say like, “well, actually I don’t want to learn about all of these complex things, I just want to attach to that easy answer that is providing me with a different structure that lessens that cognitive dissonance and so on.”

So, you know, conspiracy culture jumps in in those moments. Spirituality, oftentimes, jumps in in those moments, right? Like, both of them together jump in in those moments and hijack that impulse to actually learn and understand better, and just provide you some easy and perhaps comfortable framework that is not necessarily going to be better for the person, or society, or the community.

So that’s kind of been the main concern: how do we actually bring that epistemic humility to prevent that hijacking of all of those, not necessarily malicious, but you know, bad ideas that get people very riled up?

Chris: Yeah, that seems to be the question in our time, the “how.” Yeah, I mean it’s also just a lot of work, and not to simplify it because it is an incredible amount of work, but certainly when you have an ecology of oversimplification and reductionism as we do in our times, or at least in the way that I was raised in Toronto, Canada, it’s a constant battle to remind oneself that you were bombarded most of the time, and the bombardment of reductionism is largely unspoken because it’s so rooted in the culture, in the language of the culture. Yeah. And so, you mentioned also that the nuance and complexity that can come out of psychedelic experiences is also, I think, experienced when people travel to other cultures for example, from the global north or the global south to have psychedelic experiences.

And so, it’s my understanding that you spent several years in the Amazon working with a reputable retreat centre there. And generally speaking, tourists expectations and entitlement can often and easily lead to bad behaviour, the kind of sensationalism that often comes along in news about tourism, and while it’s easy to critique it from afar, I’d like to ask you, Adam, what you saw in your time there in the Amazon in terms of, what we might say or what we might call the lack or absence of epistemic or cultural humility. You know, I’m curious how this showed up either in your own experience or those of the people that arrived as pasajeros down there.

Adam: Yeah. I think none of these things are black or white. I think, you know, something that is important for me to say from the get-go, even though I do bring maybe a critical eye or a critical lens to many of these phenomena, I also have a lot of appreciation for the work that is done, even in retreat centres in the Amazon. I mean, I think there are a lot of complexities and a lot of sides to this. But by the end of the day, I think I do have a lot of appreciation for people who are seeking to heal, even people who are just experiencing the novelty of like different plant medicines, people that are exploring and traveling and wanting to connect with different mystical technologies or spiritual techniques or exploring other cultures, even if they’re not as well informed as they should be. I mean, there’s all sorts of different things, but at the end of the day, I think I do have respect and appreciation for the complex of beings as a whole.

That being said, I mean, yes, there are many things that can be done better, and for me, that’s kind of the approach. You know, it’s not necessarily like, oh, like all of the ayahuasca tourism sucks and we need to completely abolish and eradicate all of it, but rather like how can we actually benefit from it the most, while still contributing to a healthy culture and healthy social dynamics and diminishing the actual impact that this has on local populations, whether it’s economic or social or culture and so on and so forth.

There’s all sort of different angles to it, I think the ones that for me are more interesting... again, we were talking about epistemology. For me, the more interesting angles: of course, there are social concerns, political concerns, there’s all sorts of cultural issues that comes with the arrival of large groups of people from the global north seeking particular things in places that are poor, places that are to some extent destitute, places that are to some extent under the weight of exploitation for many, many, many years and so on. So, there’s a lot to be said about cycles of exploitation resources, whether it’s the history of the Amazon, from rubber to wood to now wisdom and knowledge.

But for me, one of the things that are most salient has to do with what are the stories that we tell people. I mean, this is something that I have focused on a lot, because for me it’s very important. I think in the last decade or fifteen years, we made out of progress, thinking about set and setting, right? This idea that psychedelic experiences don’t really happen in a vacuum, but there’s a whole lot of context and things to take care of when it comes to both our personal inner state and landscape. But at the same time, also kind of like the context in which the experiences happen, the physical spaces, the music, but there’s components to the setting, particularly that I think are not necessarily spoken about enough, and they’re definitely not curated or thought about in that way. And that part has to do more with kind of like the narrative or discursive dimensions. So what are the stories that we tell ourselves? And what are the stories that we tell people? What are the ideas that are floating out there in the culture about what ayahuasca is for, for example? Or what is plant medicine?

These are interesting questions. I mean, for example, if you open the internet and you go to ayahuasca retreat centres, there’s very, very specific narratives that you’re going to see over and over and over, right?

“Ayahuasca pretty much is a panacea for treating trauma.” You know, a very, very, very, a common story that we have nowadays. Like ayahuasca is kind of like this antidote for the root source of all Western affliction, which is trauma. I’m not saying this is true. I’m saying this is the story, right? This kind of like this cultural moment where trauma has been posited in this way through the work of Peter Levine and Gabor Mate and Bessel Van Der Kolk and all sorts of different things. Kind of like “see trauma - childhood trauma, in particular - as kind of like the source of everything that we suffer from in adulthood, from anxiety, depression, to addiction, to all sort different physical ailments, right? This idea that there’s a psychogenic theory of physical illnesses that manifest in our lives, because of things that happened to us when we were children. I mean, all these things are kind of like very, very much well-rooted in healing culture as a whole and the psychedelic world in particular.

So, if you go to the website, then you will see that. You’ll see, oftentimes, kind of those stories, appealing to a public that has been fed that story, that we’re all traumatized, that we’re all suffering we’re all suffering from all sorts of different things, and that the way out of it is to work on our childhood trauma, and the way to work with our childhood trauma is to come and drink ayahuasca in the jungle, because that’s the panacea, or at least the very best medicine that we found for it.

I’m not saying this is not necessarily true. It can be true, in some instances, for some people. There’s nuance to it, but those are the stories that are floating in the culture and, you know, in order to tell those stories, basically, which in other words, in order to attract clients to retreat centres in the rainforest. There is a need to... There’s a few things that need to be done, but one of the things that needs to be done is that there’s a need for translating an incredibly complex world of meaning, let’s say the local worlds of what ayahuasca is, how it is embedded in animistic ontologies, the worldviews of the people in the Amazon rainforest that have worked with Ayahuasca, right? There’s a need to kind of translate those worlds and sell them to potential clients, right? In order to do so, there’s the marketing piece of the thing that they need to appeal to our sensibilities, the things that Western client is looking for in these experiences. So you can’t really quite talk about things that are part of the local world, right?

I’m generalizing a lot, but talking more specifically, for example, let’s say you’re working in a, in a retreat centre that works with Shipibo people, right? And the Shipibo people, as many Amazonian people, their medical systems are medical systems that are rooted in a particular worldview. The medical systems, their theories of disease, the theories of illness, the theories of diagnosis, their theories of cures are rooted in a particular ontology, are emerging from that ontology, an ontology that is animistic, an ontology that is relational, an ontology that is based on a very different understanding of what the world is, than what most people in the global North would recognize as their own ontology, as our own ontology, which is more materialistic, more individualistic in that sense. And that has a lot of implications because, for example, for the Shipibo people, medicine and warfare or medicine and spiritual warfare are not separate domains. They’re one and the same thing. In the Shipibo worldview, again, as in many other Amazonian animistic systems, disease, for example, never really happens in a vacuum. People don’t get ill just because they get they get ill. From malaria to the flu to grave, life-threatening disease, nothing happens “just because.”

The theory of causation in these medical systems is relational. If you get sick, it’s because somebody made you sick. If you experience illness, it’s because somebody in the community of being that you’re a part of wanted you to be ill, wanted you to be And that reason can be all sorts of different reasons. I mean, there’s all sorts of different, domains of disease in Shipibo culture from cutipados to sustos to daños, But basically all of these things are relational. And what that means basically for the medic, right, for the Shipibo medical practitioner who is singing the disease out of your body, is that he’s not only cleaning you or emptying you from affliction, but is actively also engaged in combat against the afflicting entity.

Chris: Mm-hmm.

Adam: Every act of curing, every act of healing is also an act of battle, of warfare against some agent that is because of your illness, because everything is relational. And for you to get better, there’s a need to restore that reciprocity, which oftentimes means we need to get rid of the afflicting agent, and then kind of figure out what happens that that agent wanted you ill.

So, for example, I mean, you know, this can be pure sorcery or pure magic or pure brujeria in the sense of like there’s somebody who is jealous of you or somebody who doesn’t like you for whatever reason, and it’s just like sending you magic darts and making you ill, but it can be also more subtle ways that are embedded within a ecosocial way of understanding the world of how reciprocity actually is enacted in real life, in the sense that you cannot hunt in places where you’re not allowed to hunt, for whatever reason, because it’s not the right season of the year to hunt a particular animal because there needs to be a replenishment of females within a particular species, or you’re not allowed to fish in a particular cocha in a particular time of the year, because there’s a very acute awareness of the cycles of nature. And people know when to fish and who to fish and how to fish. And remembering that an animistic worldview like the fish and the deer and the bird, they’re all persons, right? They’re not just resources to be extracted, mindlessly from the rainforest. They’re people that you engage with, like people, like equals, right? So the fish and the tree and the lupuna tree or the gamitana fish or the deer or the mahaz or the huangana, like there’s a need for engagement in a horizontal person-to-person, equal-to-equal way. So if a person goes and walks under the wrong tree at the wrong time of the day, then there’s an understanding that that person might fall ill, because the tree is enforcing that illness as a result or as a manifestation of that breach in reciprocity and disrespecting an equal.

Hunting the wrong people at the wrong time of the year is a cause of illness, because there’s a breach in that understanding of reciprocity, of you are my equal and I have to respect you in that sense. And if not, then I might fall ill.

Anyway, there’s all sorts of different reasons why a person might fall ill, but all of those reasons are relational, so the healing is also relational. The curing is also relational. The singing is also relational, but to the point, you cannot really say that in the copy of a retreat centre, because you don’t want to scare people away. You can’t say, “oh, like, you’re going to be working with shamans who are also brujos. You’re going to be working in a medical system that is both wonderful but also incredibly dark. At the root of it, there’s like this understanding of reciprocity that entails constant spiritual battle spiritual battle.”

When you get to actually experience the work of a Shipibo onaya... I mean, “onaya” is a emic term, the local term that the Shipibo name themselves - the person who knows how to work with ayahuasca, what we probably would call a “shaman” in a less than ideal way. But when you get to see the work that they actually do, not in the maloca with 25 tourists from the global north, but in smaller settings in their own communities, amongst their own people, then you can really see the toll that it takes on the person, the actual damage from the spiritual warfare.

I mean, again, I’m not making an ontological assertion here that these things are ontologically real in the sense of like... you know, this is always tricky to talk about, right? Like you kind of have, finding the balance between being respectful and openminded about the understanding of the world of different cultures, but at the same time, this is where the epistemic humility comes in very handy for facilitators, right?

For example, the last thing that you want to do as a facilitator is allow a person who came to an ayahuasca retreat to leave the retreat, now convinced that their illness is due to them being haunted by a spirit or something. This is something that I’ve seen many times happen where a facilitator takes a pasajero, takes one of the participants in the ceremony to talk to the Shipibo. There’s a mistranslation of whatever the Shipibo was saying, and then the person is communicated back that their depression, or their anxiety, or their cancer, or whatever it is that they’re ailing from is actually stemming from a curse that somebody put on them, or some sort of jealousy or envy.

There’s a clash in understandings of causation. There’s a clash in understanding of how things happen and what is needed to get rid of them [illnesses]. And there’s a lot of room for iatrogenic damage in those interactions if we’re not able to navigate properly, not only the translation, but also the cultural translation and also the space for epistemic ambiguity in explaining to the person, like, “hey, this is a particular worldview, this is a particular way of understanding things. We’re working within this system, yes, but that doesn’t mean that every person has to completely attach themselves now to that belief system, which is something that happens quite a lot, right? Many of the facilitators in the Amazon Rainforest learn and study with Shipibo healers within a Shipibo framework, and then they become extremely religious, extremely attached to those particular belief systems, and then they reproduce those things in a way that perhaps is not ideal either.

There’s something that I write about a lot in my book - ontological caricatures. This idea that, as much as we would like to try and translate worldviews that are as foreign as, let’s say, a Shipibo, animistic, relational framework can be for me, that translation is always going to be reductive. It’s always going to be incomplete. It’s always going to be a caricature or something that I may approximate an understanding of, but I can’t quite articulate in the same way that an actual Shipibo person who was born in the rainforest, who was raised within that framework, who train their brain with the perception of this jungle life and relationality and so on. I mean, there’s always going to be a massive distance, even between the most observant and well-intentioned, external researcher trying to understand that world. There’s always going to be a distance between him or her and an actual person that grew up within that worldview, and trained within the worldview all the time. So our best attempts at translations are always going to be caricatures. And what we’re selling people are always going to be those caricatures.

And they’re caricatures, not only because they’re incomplete or low-resolution, the caricatures also, because when the incentives of marketing kick in, we’re also stripping away those caricatures from all their complexity, because we’re basically sanitizing them, we want to wash away all the darker sides of it. We don’t want to put the word “brujeria“ on our website. We don’t want to talk about a soul sorcery that is inherent to those interactions, right? We want to kind of sell a sanitized version where the spirits of the plants and the Shipibo healers are basically omni benevolent, omnipotent, omniscient, like faint figures that are only working for our benefit for some reason. Like, “the plants of the Amazon really have it as their main goal to heal every foreigner that comes to the jungle because they’re just omnibenevolent” and so on. So, this is something that pretty much every website or every Instagram account of every retreat centre, or the email copy of the people who are working there sells.

This is one version of another, extremely reductive, extremely sanitized, extremely hygienic sort of caricature that sells a product that is meant to appeal to a very wide audience. There’s little resemblance to what actually is the belief system, the worldview, the epistemology of the local communities that are working with those plants, that are offering those services, that are being impacted by this meeting of cultures, whose culture, whose belief systems, whose ontologies and epistemologies are being reduced to something that is mostly used as a marketing ploy to attract people to them. But again, like it bears little resemblance to the actual thing.

So you know, this ontological caricature is something that I also have called the Disneyfication of plant medicine. This Disney-fying process, in which the whole industry becomes a Disneyfied version. And what I mean by Disneyfied is when we say the attributes of Disneyland. Again, “this happy place, omnibenevolent, omnibenevolent we try to hide as much as possible the darker aspects of it. The ugly sides of it kind of get tucked away, and we just kind of offer this fantasy wonderland of omnibenevolence. And you’re just coming here to heal and to transform and everything is fine. And there’s no risk. There’s no danger. There’s, there’s just a promise, right? We’re selling kind of like this aspirational promise of healing trauma.”

Yeah, it’s a very Disneyfied thing to that extent, that it’s very sanitized, very hygenized, a very incomplete version that we’re selling people in order to attract them. them And I mean, in this era of globalized psychotics, it’s inevitable, because for example, you have to have a unique selling point if you’re competing against an increasingly large number of people offering ceremonies worldwide. So they say like, “Hey, how do I draw people from Brooklyn or from London or from Sydney in Australia? How do I sell them the idea that it’s very important for them to actually come to the source of it, to work in the jungle with actual Shipibo who are very authentic, instead of just joining an ayahuasca circle in their hometown?”

I mean, there’s a lot of competition nowadays. The ayahuasca industry is global, and it’s massive.

There’s thousands of ceremonies happening in every big city, over the world every week. So, So there’s kind of like this, this need to create this Disneyfied version to keep the competitive edge. Does that make sense to you?

Chris: It makes, it makes a lot of sense. And that was incredible. I have no doubt that you defended your thesis with precision and beauty. Wow. You know, I want to ask about this, note that you suggested. When someone who spends maybe not enough time, but enough time in, for example, in a place like the Amazon, with a culture like the Shipibo, for example, to gather in the dynamics and even specificities of their culture perhaps superficially or otherwise, and then applies them to their own life or experience or illness or health, or even takes it back home with them, for example, to the global North. wherein there’s, you know no cultural framework to support that kind of thing, or just people who would even understand at the very least, what the person is referring to or talking about.

I mean, there’s definitely this sense of iatrogenesis that you mentioned. And I’m wondering as well within, I guess a more fundamental and less specific level, if this notion of health and illness as inherently relational, as inherently social, as affecting or even afflicting a “social body” as opposed to an individual or, or personal body.

You know, I mean I’ve lived here in Oaxaca, Mexico for the last 10 years. I’ve spent a lot of time in indigenous villages and peered into the indigenous systems are understandings of health and illness here. And they definitely mirror what you’re saying in terms of this relational notion.

And I’m curious, you know. Leaving the specificities of spiritual warfare that exists in the Amazon aside, how do you think that the understanding or the, the possibility of conceiving of health and illness in a relational context might be a kind of sobering, reconfiguring of our understanding of health illness in the global north or in the West, or among modern people to the extent that, well, maybe this might help us not have to pry and ply the unconsidered and maybe even incoherent concepts of other people, and I want to say incoherent - incoherent in the sense that you were referring to in the example that you gave about someone trying to apply it cross-culturally in a way that doesn’t fit. Do you think that a relational model might help us to reconfigure the ways in which we come to health and illness, and the ways in which we are healthy in the world or not?

Adam: Well, I mean, I think that’s my hope. That’s what I hope to achieve also as a facilitator in the rainforest. Every retreat I facilitate to every group that I had the opportunity to talk to when I was there, I always made one session, which was basically based on understanding health, not necessarily as a purely individual process, but as a relational process, not necessarily within the framework of animistic agency and so on, but like just very basic things, right? It was surprising in the beginning that people were not aware of these ideas as much as I would like them to be, but also like the reception was very good all the time, because there were things that just clicked in people’s minds. Again, when you’re selling a story of individual transformation and individual healing... I mean, all the healing culture is extremely individualistic in the sense that it kind of like pretends to form communities in the world. But all the interventions, all the understanding of what it means to be happy and healthy with spirituality, are extremely hyper-individualistic because they’re emergent from overarching kind of like neoliberal culture, that very much takes the individual as the main and only unit of analysis, most of the time.

So, for the most part, what it means to be happy and healthy is an individual process, right? Like, “I have my trauma, I go, I drink ayahuasca, I process my trauma, I develop better habits and so on.” But it’s always kind of like individual transformation, individual healing, individual transformation.

There was a mantra at the place where I worked. A mantra that was repeated pretty much by every facilitator to everybody that came: your individual healing and transformation is the best gift that you can offer the world. You know, that kind of sounds right and sounds true, and it may be in that sense. It is very important for each individual to do our own work as it were. We have to do our work so we can actually heal, transform and then have an impact, but there is also a very navel-gazing culture around that thing where the only thing that matters at the end of the day... I mean, you can very easily interpret that saying “your individual healing and transformation is the best gift that you can offer in the world,” that can very easily be skewed towards what actually happens in the field most of the time, which is complete devaluation of any sort of approach to health, wellbeing, happiness that is not rooted in my own individual process, that is not encapsulated within my own individual psyche. So we kind of just become passive consumers, of retreats, of techniques, of supplements, of classes. But it’s kind of like we’re once again, falling into the cycle of individual consumption, whereas we at some point hope that we’ll escape the matrix just by putting ourselves through the proverbial dishwasher, just like once more and once more, and once again another retreat and another workshop, and another class, and this is a supplement that is going to help, or this is the thing.

So, when I had a group, I would very explicitly try to deconstruct that idea and illuminate the way in which actually health is inherently relational, right? The individual health is inherently connected or related to the health of our communities, and how my individual health is inherently connected to the health of the society that I live in and the culture from which I feel, and the environment which sustains me in all sorts of ways.

And when you talk about these connections and you make them explicit, a lot of people say, “oh yeah, well that’s pretty obvious.” But the truth is that it’s not that obvious in the day-to-day when a person is still self absorbed into this vortex of individualized interventions, right? When you go to a place like the Amazon, for example, and you dig a little bit into what’s actually happening there, and you contemplate the ecological catastrophe that the Amazon is nowadays, right? Like the rivers... there’s all sorts of different things that are happening that are really catastrophic ecological processes that are having a massive impact in the health of communities and individuals.

If the rivers are polluted with oil, because of the oil companies that are extracting oil in the Amazon and then just dumping the pipes or never ever really fixing the pipes in the rivers, the rivers are polluted beyond any practical use for indigenous and mestizo riverine people that live alongside the banks of those rivers are using that water to drink from it and cultivate crops and so on, and they’re getting sick and they’re dying. Then, it’s very easy to illuminate the intrinsic link between environmental health and individual health. If we’re drinking polluted water, then we’re going to be sick.

We, for the most part, in the developed, global north, have the privilege of not having to think about these things all the time, because we’re not drinking water from polluted rivers most of the time. I mean, some of us are, of course. There’s all sorts of massive problems in the north, global north as well, but they’re not as immediate and they’re not as acute as for a lot of people in the global south, including many Amazonian communities that are actually dying all the time just because of the pollution in the rivers.

So, illuminating the link between environmental health and individual health is one way that we can actually yank the person out of the self-absorbed individual healing process and endless process of doing the internal work of changing the locus of healing and transformation from the internal to the external.

Sometimes. It’s fine, it’s okay to have one eye inwards and maybe one eye outwards, right? So, what I tried to encourage people was, as they underwent seven ayahuasca ceremonies and did all of this personal work and all of this healing work and transformation work, and digging out traumas and whatever it is that they we’re there to do...

I’m not saying this with contempt, I’m saying this maybe with a little bit of irony, but a lot of respect for every single person that actually does this work because it’s not easy work.

We can keep that one eye inwards and do all of that heavy, shitty, emotional, psychological, self-absorbed work, but at the same time one eye outwards. Well, actually, it’s actually becoming much, much clearer that community health impacts individual health in all sorts of different ways. I mean, we know, for example, in the West, we’re going through massive epidemics of loneliness, massive epidemics of alienation. We know that loneliness is a massive problem, that is not only a social problem, it’s an individual problem. I’m speaking of men in particular. When men are lonely, when men are alienated, when men don’t have a strong community that binds them to degrees of accountability or reciprocity of being a productive member of a community that is encompassing, then we’re very easily radicalized. It’s very easy to radicalize people who are lonely. It’s very easy to radicalize people who are alienated. It’s very easy to radicalize people who have lost any semblance of community, who are not in balance, who are not accountable by people who love them. And there’s reciprocity in those interactions. It’s very easy to hijack those minds and say like, “Hey, you know, like all of your problems are because of immigrants, all of your problems are because of Jews, all your problems are because of somebody that becomes a scapegoat for an incredibly important socio-cultural problem that then gets individualized in the person.

Or cultural issues that are very important. I mean, political issues are very impactful of individual health. This is one of the examples that I always gave people, because it’s easy to connect with: if we live in a consumerist culture where everywhere we go, whether we’re on the street or we’re in the car listening to the radio, or just trying to watch TV and unwind, and we’re being bombarded thousands of times a day with the same messaging that is meant to get us to buy shit that we don’t want or we don’t really need. I mean, advertising kind of like relies on one assumption, which is like we have to make that person feel incomplete. We have to make that person feel insecure. We want to sell you the shit that you don’t really need. We want to create that artificial sense of scarcity or that artificial sense of insecurity.

So there’s a whole culture that thrives on you feeling insecure with yourself, right? So, when a person goes on the street, and we see these ads all the time of these beautiful people drinking a glass of wine, or we hear these things telling us that we’re not good enough, we’re not pretty enough, we’re not rich enough, we’re not something enough, then that cultural malware is going to have an impact in our individual health, because we’re not only going to feel more insecure, we’re also going to feel anxious, we’re going to feel depressed. Our self-esteem is going to suffer. There’s all sorts of things that are cultural issues that are actually also very impactful to our individual sense of health.

So what happens when we individualize everything is that we lose sight of those things, right? We lose sight of the need for community as an inherent part of our happiness. We lose sight of the damage that consumerist culture does to our wellbeing by producing this artificial sense of not being enough. We lose sight of like the massive damage that social media, perverse incentives, are having on how we are. They keep us trapped into these doom-scrolling traps just by hijacking our dopaminergic systems. Say, “Hey, we’re going to fill you with rage-bait forever and ever to keep you engaged in our platforms. That’s a technological problem that’s also a social problem, but it’s also a cultural problem that manifests as a massive, massive, massive individual issue for a lot of people, right?

I mean, I definitely feel that. I mean, I’m definitely suffering a lot from social media addictions that are structural issues with how these technologies are designed. So, illuminating those links between individual health and community health; individual health, society, culture, technology, environment and so on, is a very, very important step forward into a healing culture that is able to stop navel-gazing and stop that self-absorption into our individual.

We have to start looking also at structure because if we’re not at looking structure. If we’re not looking structures, if we’re not creating better structures, then we’re going to keep having the same results, right? Individuals, as much as we want to think that we’re kind of like these semi-divine Gods and Goddesses who are all powerful and so on, I mean, by the end of the day, we are results of the structures that we inhabit. And Unless we actually do the work to change structures, then we’re always going to be spiraling like a hamster wheel, chasing our own healing and transformation while the structures that we inhabit are completely broken.

There are, in the west, have been, always, very deep awareness of those things.

It’s called public health. The pandemic destroyed it forever. I mean, I don’t know, “forever.” Let’s not say “forever,” but the pandemic did massive damage to the public trust in expertise, right? Like the response to the pandemic now created boogie, a monster kind of like this, I Dunno what the expression is, but public health.

Public health, right? Epidemiologist and public health professionals and so on and so forth are now, kind of the enemy of a lot of people. Public health interventions are now seen as fascism. Social determinants of health, which is something, that should be at the forefront of any medical understanding anywhere in the world, are now just “woke garbage.”

So this understanding that class has an impact in individual health. The poverty is one of the most important things to consider when we’re trying to make an intervention to make people healthier. It’s not only about whether people have access to food that doesn’t have red dyes, but the quality of the food that people are able to purchase. I mean, there’s all sorts of different things that fall within that rubric of public health, of social determinants, of health, of health interventions that are not designed just for individual people, but to like really strengthen the health of communities and societies and cultures. So we have different individual results, but all of those things nowadays are kind of like being completely demonized since the response to the pandemic created a boogie monster and like the anti-woke backlash really saw any sort of attempt to bring forth things about class or race and so on and so forth.

I mean, it’s going to take a while for that to rebound, I guess. But nowadays we’re in a moment in time where all those things are very easily chucked to the side, demonized and increasingly even criminalized. Public health.

Chris: Wow. Wow. Thank you, Adam. In terms of this through line around ecological or social health, I’m curious if whether in your time in the Amazon, or elsewhere, or in your studies, if the people, now I guess this question kind of runs in two parallel directions.

We could speak of the people who operate and own and administer psychedelic retreat centres, and then also the indigenous communities that are employed by them. In your time there before or since, was there any consideration as to the consequences of social health for the indigenous communities there as a result of tourism?

I’ve seen it, I’ve read it. There’s a kind of back and forth debate about whether tourism is now causing more sorcerous attacks or spiritual warfare between, curanderos or shamans or villages, or whether it’s lessening. There’s also the question of the diaspora: the amount of healers from the Amazon who essentially take their skills on the road and spend most of their time in the global north, treating modern people as opposed to those in the villages. There can be, in some places, might be in other places, perhaps is a degree of inequality that is growing, either within the villages or between the villages as a result of this tourism.

So, I’d love to hear your opinion on it, but I’m also curious, if you saw any willingness to consider that, not just among the retreat centre owners, but also the indigenous communities there in the Amazon.

Adam: I really cannot speak to either retreat centre owners or operators, or indigenous people per se. But I mean, I can give some observations in terms of this phenomena. When talking about indigenous people, I think also is very important, when talking about the Shipibo people, for example, I think it’s very important to note that this is not a monolithic voice. There’s no consensus about any of these things. Every person has their own opinions. There’s all sorts of different ideas, opinions and feelings about it. Some people are more radical to either side of it. I mean, I definitely met Shipibo people who were extremely appalled by the whole thing, and they were very conservative and very protective of their own things and very reticent to give knowledge to gringos.

And I met others who were all over the place, like free-for-all, you know, like, “just come, pay us money and we’ll give it.” And I think it’s important to note not only is it not a monolithic set of beliefs or ideas, but also that Shipibo people have of agency within this construct. I mean, it is very asymmetric in the sense that of course, people from the global north do come with much more resources, money, power, decision-making, and so on and so forth, which means that the incentives for the Shipibo populations are fairly strong. I mean, it’s very difficult. For example, if a Shipibo healer or onaya gets hired, or he gets the opportunity to be hired by a leading retreat centre and go work there for three months, I mean the payment or the amount of money that he would make in three months working in a retreat centre away from home is something that will be difficult to say no to, even if that means leaving their communities and their families without their work, which happens all the time.

So my cats are jumping around. I think it’s zoomies time.

So, it is true, for example, that many trained onayas are not serving their communities anymore, both because the majority of the time they’re working with us in, whether it’s in ayahuasca retreat centres, or just traveling around the world, or operating their own retreat centres. This is something that has happened quite a lot in the last 5-7 years, is that many Shipibo families who were on the first waves of employment in Western-owned retreat centres, they figure it out like, “Hey, we don’t have to be employees of anyone. The knowledge, the skills, the resources are ours.” The only thing that we need is our own physical environment, and the know-how, how to run a business. And to the credit of ayahuasca retreat owners, such as in the place where I worked at, there’s a lot of help that is being given to the Shipibo families.

Like, “Hey, you worked for us for many years, and now we’re gonna reciprocate by helping you to create your own dieta centres, whether it’s logistically, knowledge-wise, consulting economically, and now many of the Shipibo onaya bo that I met in the beginning of my time in the Amazon as salaried labourers, as employees or retreat centres, nowadays they have their own centres. They attract their own public, which is mostly made out of people that they met working at retreat centres. They created their own clientele. They came up with their own model of how to give plant dietas. You know, they get a lot of help in marketing by previous guests, they get a lot of social media training by previous guests. I mean all, there’s a lot of gaps that are bridged just by this intercultural, cross-cultural fertilization that happens all the time.

And, it’s neither negative or positive. I think that really depends who you’re talking to. I mean, I think as a whole, there’s a lot of Shipibo families, a lot of Shipibo practitioners that are now retreat centre owners that travel the world, offering medicine to people that love the work that they do.

Has that increased jealousy in the Amazon?

Of course. I mean, it’s completely ripped apart many Shipibo communities for obvious reasons. I mean, if you’re living a lifestyle that is 4, 5, 6, 7 steps upward from the median income, from a median lifestyle, then of course there’s gonna be people opening eyes on “what are you doing” and “how are you doing it?” And so on and so forth.

So there’s many internal frictions. There’s also been some attempts to regulate those internal frictions in some, in different sort of ways. Shipibo associations of onaya bo got together for the first time a few years ago, trying to provide some guidelines of internal regulations for Shipibo shamans on how to work, where to work you know, what kind of conditions...

I mean, I don’t know where they’re at now, to be honest. I haven’t really followed up on it, but back in the day, we were kind of trying to come up with ideas, that at least some of the money that is sunk into retreat centres comes back to Shipibo communities, whether it’s in forms of school, to train younger generations, which is a massive problem for the Shipibo, still today.

The vast majority of apprentices of Shipibo medical systems are not Shipibo. They’re Westerners like you and I that come to the jungle. They fall in love, they fall in love with the medicine, and they want to become shamans themselves, Where Shipibo youth are not so inclined. They have the opposite drive. They want to go to the city. They want to go to university. They want to join the western world, because that’s what they see as the best path forward. So it’s kind of like these Westerners coming to the jungle to learn ayahuasca, to practice ayahuasca, to eventually provide ayahuasca, whereas most Shipibo people, youth are in the opposite direction, getting as far away as from it as possible, going to university, becoming accountants or lawyers or anything that kind of brings them closer to mainstream Peruvian society. I mean, things are changing all the time. With the people that I, that I spend time with, the families that I spend time with in the Ucayali in Peru, seeing that in the last 10-15 years there has been such an influx of foreigners, maybe people do rethink whether actually learning from the grandparents and practicing the crafts of the families are a better idea. You know, both there’s an economic future in it.

There’s definitely prestige in it. There’s definitely the opportunity for travel. I mean, there’s all sorts of different things that are changing very quickly. Again, it’s not a very monolithic thing. I think different people think different things. I mean for sure, there are things that are pretty universal within contemporary Shipibo criticism again, which is like, “how can we channel more resources into communities? How can we ensure that there’s a future for Shipibo youth within the system, that is not only gringos.” All these things get talked about all the time. And I’m sure that there’s also sort of new developments that I’m unaware of that touch on many of these things, emically from their part.

Chris: Hmm. Wow. Wow. Fascinating. Thank you, Adam. So I have a strange question.

Adam: Sure.

Chris: I have a very left field question that I’ve been wondering about for a few years. So when modern people show up in places like the Amazon or Oaxaca, for example, searching out psychedelic medicines or healing, when they do so as tourists dropping in and flying out, they often come and go with little to no understanding of their level of consequence on a place, consequence that is often lost on them because of the short term duration of their stays, and often because the politics of such things are kept from visitors as you mentioned a little bit earlier. so there’s this kind of touristic element that appears perhaps inherent in psychedelic retreat centres and weekend, weekend warrior ceremonies.

So if we take this, these notions of hypermobility, of temporariness and relative ignorance of, for example, the local culture and history, and if we consider the immense consequence that we have in the places that we visit do you think that we as humans have the same consequence in the psychedelic realm?

Do you think we show up as tourists in the psychedelic realm? And if so, what do you think are the consequences for the psychedelic realm or the medicine or the spirits of the medicine?

Adam: Oh, okay. So you, you’re talking about astral the psychedelic, realms.

Chris: Right. And the context kind of kind of boils down to a degree of hospitality.

If we arrive in a place and we have no invitation, if we have no understanding of the language that the people speak, if we bring no gifts with us, if we just walk in expecting to be fed. If this is sometimes a part of what psychedelic tourism is like, do you think there’s a possibility that we also have some adverse effect on the psychedelic realm when we go there in the same way, or in similar ways?

Adam: Huh. Well, I mean, this is really a conversation for maybe a post-rave state when we’re both on mushrooms and smoking a joint. I think speculating about psychedelic realms is very tricky. I think there’s so many assumptions about what those spaces are, who we are interacting with. This is, maybe again, where epistemic humidity comes into it. I think, my own ideas about what this means have changed quite radically and keep changing all the time, you know, from being a true believer about this space of objectivity when I’m interacting with real, essential beings or ontologically real in front of me all the time, that there’s a knowable dimension of relationships that I can cultivate by coming back to these places and meeting these real people as if they were my family.

You know, I’ve “dieted” quite a lot . I mean, “dieting,” if anybody hasn’t heard about this concept, it’s kind of like the way that many Amazonian cultures, including the Shipibo, can forge these relationships with plant helpers and plant spirits and different medicines through a dieting process that basically entails isolation, social isolation and fasting, and a lot of meditation and creating kind of the right container for focusing on crafting a relationship with one particular plant or one particular plant spirit. And I mean, I’ve done that multiple over the course of weeks or months, sometimes. I’ve done a few diets and every time that I do it, I’m kind of very much drawn into this world of relationships of like objective, ontological beings that I’m in contact with and forging relationships with and then that kind of fades away, and I fall back into like, “well, maybe there’s an ontological primacy to my imagination, as opposed to an actual realm that is objectively real out there.”

I mean, these are very tricky things and I think this is where epistemic humility comes in. maybe it’s a cop out, maybe just my lack of courage to take a stand, but I mean, I feel comfortable saying like, “you know, I don’t fucking know what’s going on in those spaces.” Every time that I visit, I’m blown away. Every time that I visit, I end up in the state of awe and reverence. But at the same time, I’m not gonna tell you, like, “this is real,” “this is not,” “this is what is,” “this is what it’s not.” I think we’re very, very, very far from being able to even approximate any sort of certainty about these states, about these places.

For me, it may be that a lot of that is projection from my imagination. It may be that a lot of that is an actual space that I enter while I’m in contact with actual intelligences that are external to me. I think, a lot of people will resonate with both of those things.

Maybe people have other ideas that are there. For me, I don’t feel that I need to convince myself that there’s anything particularly that any belief system is better. I think I’m very comfortable just visiting the spaces without any sort of certainty and dwelling with it that uncertainty is fine.

But you know, to your question, I’ve had experiences, when I dieted of chiricsanango, I thought it was killing me. In the last ceremony that I did. Chiricsanango is a plant, one of the master plants in the Shipibo pharmacopeia, considered like a very strong, stern but loving teacher in many ways. I mean, you’re not supposed to diet chiricsanango early on your path. It’s something that you do after many years, many diets, many incarnations of all sorts of different practices. I went into chiricsanango fairly early and during my last day with... I mean, I dieted it for one month. And during the last ceremony, like the closing ceremony of my diet with that plant, I just had an experience where I felt like something just strangling me, and a very stern entity was speaking to me and basically telling me, “you don’t have the respect that you need for this experience.” Like, basically, “you didn’t go into this wholeheartedly and you’re gonna pay the price for it.” And then, it just kind of started strangling me. I felt all of my body breaking and compressing. I felt different parts of my body starting to shut down one by one, until it basically just came out to my lungs and my heart. And then just having this voice of like, “there’s nothing left for you to do. You fucked up. Just let go.” You know?

And I did. I thought, “well, you know, I fucked up. I went into this experience unprepared, and now I’m paying the price and it’s gonna kill me, and I’m gonna die.” And I did die. And then of course, I reemerged from the other side with this massive amount of reverence and a newfound respect for this path.

I mean, I tell this story just kind of a personal anecdote of going into something that I wasn’t really prepared for, or that at least I thought I wasn’t prepared for. What happened there, I don’t know. I mean, it was a dead and river experience for sure.

Was the spirit lecturing me? Was the spirit kicking my ass about being unserious? A projection of my own fears? A projection of my own unconscious? An actual encounter with a chiricsanango entity that was just...? I don’t know. Do I have to know?

It probably would be good for me to take a stand. As far as I can tell both of those possibilities are true, or possible and maybe there’s many other possibilities.

When I was younger, I had a friend. Well, I mean, I had many friends. We also did a lot of reckless stuff with plants and so on. And I remember one time, we smoked salvia. You know, back in the day you could buy that in the gas station in different countries. I don’t know what the status is today. I think you can’t anymore, because it’s a fucking scary thing to do. And I remember one of my friends just taking a big hit of salvia from a bong, and then going into this state and then just coming out of it with the most terrified expression that I ever seen in a living person, and the only thing that he said is, he said, “the spirit of salvia appeared to me and she told me, if you do this ever again, I will kill you.”

Chris: Wow. Wow.

Adam: Yeah. And we were like, “you know what, maybe, maybe we don’t want to mess with this thing again.” Like all of us. So, I don’t know. You know? I mean, again, was that really the spirit of salvia just warning him? Was it his own projection of fear? I don’t know.

My honest per my honest appraisal of these things: anyone who professes any degree of certainty about ontological and epistemic matters related to the psychedelic experience is either self-deluded or a charlatan. My personal opinion.

Chris: Anyone from modern culture or the global north?

Adam: Yeah. I’m going to exclude indigenous people, because their worldviews match those experiences to some extent, and I think when you grow up with that sort of programming or cultural programming, with that sort of ontological priming, I mean it’s impossible for me to say it’s impossible.

I very much respect the animistic perspective. I think the world as a whole would be much better off if all of us were animistic to some extent, at the very least, if we had that understanding of reciprocity, of personhood, of respect as equals.

Who was it that said this? I think David Thomas Berry I think, framed it as an understanding of the world as a community of subjects to be in relationship with, as opposed to a collection of objects to extract from personal benefit, right?

if all of us approach the world in that way, as a community of subjects, as a thou. I mean Martin Buber gave a distinction, right? Like “I and Thou” versus “I and It.” The world, not as an “it,” but as a “thou,” as a “you,” as an equal.

I mean, I think we would be much better off everybody. So I have a lot of respect and appreciation for animism. I think animism is a much better framework for relating to the world than whatever it’s that we have.

Chris: Hmm, amazing. Yeah. Thank you for being willing to share those rather trepidatious stories with us. But from time to time you’ll hear people in the psychedelic subculture use these experiences or similar experiences or the quote unquote “bad trip” as a kind of metaphor for the psychedelic subculture at large that, you know, whether it was in the centuries that followed eradication of indigenous wisdom on the European continent and elsewhere as a result of the inquisitions or the witch hunts, or whether it was after the madness and destruction of World War II, there seems to be an unwillingness to approach these plants and certainly even other cultures, with a degree of reverence and awe that would properly sit on the throne, I think of the kind of worlds that we’d otherwise wish to live in.

Adam: Yeah, totally.

Chris: And, you know, you answered my final question, which was, what kind of steps do you think we take going forward in terms of the psychedelic subculture and, and this is something you’ve done for the last almost hour and a half, is proceed with a degree of epistemic humility practicing it, speaking it.

And, you know, I’m deeply, deeply grateful for that. I would just say, people are gonna seek these things out and there’s a degree of respect and courage even that’s inherent in the willingness to do so still, in a time of War on D rugs.

Adam: I mean, you know, again, like honestly, these things are going away.

I mean, retreat centres are gonna keep popping up. People are gonna keep going to the Amazon. They’re gonna keep going to the Mazatec mountains, they’re gonna keep going to the Zapotec mountains in Oaxaca. They’re gonna keep going to Costa Rica. I mean, a lot of things gonna continue happening and probably going to increase more and more as entropy increases. As our social and cultural frameworks continue to collapse to some extent, I think people are gonna keep seeking for answers and seeking for all sorts of different ideas and inspirations.

I think it is very important that we do pay more attention to story, narrative and discourse. I think it’s very important that we get a lot more critical voices involved in these things, not only highlighting risks of iatrogenic damage and so on and so forth, but also, I think there’s many dogmas that have been at the heart of healing culture for a very long time, very individualistic approaches to what it means to be happy and healthy, discourses on root cause and so on.

I mean, one thing that I do, I teach a lot of classes and different training courses and all sorts of different things that they invite me to say. One of the things that I oftentimes say to students is, “If there’s one thing that I would like to transmit or the one thing that I would like not to see is any of you becoming cult leaders. I don’t want any of you to be cult leaders. I don’t want in the future to see that you’re own running a cult with your own preconceived ideas and a high degree of certainty about ideas that you have no business being certain about.”

And, you know, conspirituality as a whole is very prone to cultish dynamics. Psychedelics are very inducive towards cult dynamics if they’re not properly integrated and there’s not a proper process of apprenticeship, apprenticeship that requires a very high degree of epistemic humility, but also that willingness to constantly revisit our own assumptions, our own stories, own belief systems, and so on and so forth. Then, not only that, but constantly revisioning and acknowledging how our own stories, our own beliefs, our own frameworks affect the people that we work with.

So, you know, first of all, when we talk about the iatrogenic damage in the context of psychedelics, healing culture, conspirituality, don’t become a cult leader, most importantly. Secondly, always kind of like be aware and self-critical and self-aware of all the different stories that you carry with you. How do we project that when we work with people? How do we project that in our own experiences? For practitioners, for medicine providers, for retreat centre operators, like a constant, constant, constant, process of self-awareness about those things.

What I would like to see personally, I would like to see a much less emphasis on individual healing and transformation, and much more emphasis on how can we actually approach structure? How can we actually approach structural issues? How can we actually use psychedelics, not necessarily as you know, tools of endless self-absorption and self-contemplation, but actually as catalysts for catalysts for change, like real change that has material impact on a lot of people, bringing back to the forefront social determinants of health, bringing back to the forefront public health, maybe in a revisited way that doesn’t create as much animosity and antagonism with people, but at the same time just that understanding that actually being happy and healthy is a collective project, and by the end of the day, nobody can be fully happy and healthy unless we’re all happy and healthy to some extent.

Those are the most important things. You know, I mean if the Oracle Delphi have scribed on the lintel “know thyself,” I think that’s very important. Know thyself. But I think in modern times, “know thyself” is not enough. I think modern times it’s know thyself, but also know how embedded you are in all different layers of being, and how you’re impacted by them and impact them in turn. And how can we always keep one eye looking inwards, doing our work, doing what it is that we need to be better people, but at the same time, one eye outward. We’re not ignoring structure, we’re not ignoring structural issues. We’re not ignoring social, cultural, political, environmental things that affect all of us and how we can actually have that impact.

I think that would be what I would like to see.

Chris: Hmm. Well count me in. Count me in, brother. Thank you, Adam. On behalf of those listening, I’d like to offer you a deep bow for your work and your contemplations and your critiques and for your time with me today. It’s been a great honour to be able to speak with you, to be able to listen to, what I can see is, someone who is clearly, walking the walk, and talking the talk of epistemic humility.

And, so I’d like to ask finally for our listeners, how might they find out more about your work, whether on social media, Substack or elsewhere?

Adam: Yeah, I mean I think the starting point for most people would be the Healing From Healing Instagram, which nowadays... it changed a lot throughout the last three or four years.

I mean, now it’s really more focused on humour than critique, even though it’s still very critical and skeptical about many of the things. But for a more nuance and a little bit more in depth take on the things that I like to showcase in the Instagram page, then definitely the Substack also called “Healing From Healing.”

And you can follow me both on Instagram and the Substack and the thesis I think is gonna be available soonish, so you can just Google my name and it’s probably gonna pop up. Yeah, so Instagram page Healing From Healing. Like, follow, comment. And then, the Substack really is the project that I’m more interested in now. I haven’t really written anything new in a couple of months, because I was focused on finishing the doctoral dissertation, but I think that’s going to become the platform where mostly I’m going to put up my writings in the future.

Chris: Hmm. Fantastic. Yeah. I look forward to reading your dissertation, Adam.

And hopefully by the time the episode is up on the internet, that’ll be available and I’ll be putting it in the homework section along with the links to your Instagram and Substack.

So once again, Adam, thank you so much deeply for your time today.

Adam: My pleasure.

Thank you for having me.

Leave a comment

#0.7 | Myth and Mythos

Chris Christou — Thu, 15 Jan 2026 14:29:39 GMT

On this episode, we dive into the podcast pillar of myth and mythos. How do old myths such as the Odyssey or the Bible inform how we move even if we’ve never read them? To what extent can we understand how myth and all that roots it arise to incline us toward certain ways of travelling? If we can readjust our sight in order to recognize the mythic ground of being we walk upon, could we then walk differently, organizing other ways of travel that serve, rather than starve the world?

Transcript

Welcome friends to Season Zero of the End of Tourism podcast. In these mini-episodes, you’ll hear short transmissions speaking to the principles of the pod. We’ll introduce you, our listeners to the themes and questions that will be woven into our conversations, a kind of primer on our politics. This episode is entitled “Myths and Mythos”

Travel has long held a central place in the mythic imagination of countless cultures. From pilgrimage to conquest, exploration to exile, travel to migration, the open road to the great beyond, such themes have captivated local understandings of home, away, the strange and the stranger, hospitality and danger. From Gilgamesh to the Odyssey, from the Crusades to Manifest Destiny, the myths and mythos that define our cultures’ travelling ways tend to define us, whether we’re aware of them or not.

Myth, to me, tends toward the incarnation in a more solid-state, storytelling kind of corpus. Myth is, to a large degree, story, that arises out of the mythos of a people. Mythos is an ancient Greek word that, according to philosopher Raimon Panikkar, means “the things we believe in without believing that we believe in them.” Mythos is the undercurrent and undertow of culture. It is the unseen understory of who we are as cultural people, waters that are often so transparent so as to be invisible.

According to Panikkar, every attempt to make our mythos tangible changes our mythos. When expressed through song, story, music, dance, art, and gastronomy – the main foundations of culture – mythos becomes myth, or even a myth. Panikkar speaks to mythos’ more well-known sibling logos, another ancient Greek term often mistaken to mean “word.” As in “in the beginning was the word or logos.” But logos is more properly understood as “expression” or more poetically, the incarnation of unknown.

Myths point toward our cultural undercurrents, taking us on often wild rides into the coded language and landscapes wherein all that has given rise to our days rests and resides. Surely there are myths that are magical, fantastic, and speak to strange worlds very different from our own. Fairy tales, folk tales, riddles and creation stories. These are often what we associate with myth, celebrated or sundered as they may be in our time. But there are other myths that people still hold quite dear, as religious as any registered denomination. These are national myths, family myths, political, social, and economic myths, racial, sexual and gender-based myths, that we often call stereotypes or worse.

It is through mythic or what some call mythopoetic lenses that we can begin to form search parties for dreams deferred, descending into the murk of mythos, undertaking underworld journeys in order to acknowledge the watery aspects of our days and especially those of our cultures that for too long have been polluted, principally by our inability to express, enflesh, to put clothes on the invisible men that mythicize and demythicize our times. It is through such mythic lenses that we might become more humble students of the worlds around us, acknowledging our myths, some that no longer serve us and others that have long been waiting to be told, sung, stretched and served.

One of the themes of the podcast is Myth and Mythos. By digging in to the mythic depths and footprints of our millennial movements, we can begin to braille and read, remember and refine, and finally redefine the myths that move us, whether via tourism, migration or other forms of travel. In so doing, we might filter the bullshit from our own mythic watersheds and our own mythic understandings. We might come to see clearly where our prejudices and biases come from, both as persons and cultures. In that way we might begin to be able to imagine, which is to say channel new stories of travel, stories of pilgrimage towards worlds whereby our footprints are recognized by strangers, perhaps descendants as people worthy of an invitation. Welcome to the end of tourism.

S7 #1 | Ritual Relationships: Matrimony, Hospitality and Strangerhood | Stephen Jenkinson (Orphan Wisdom)

Chris Christou — Tue, 23 Sep 2025 16:04:00 GMT

On this episode, my guest is Stephen Jenkinson, culture activist and ceremonialist advocating a handmade life and eloquence. He is an author, a storyteller, a musician, sculptor and off-grid organic farmer. Stephen is the founder/ principal instructor of the Orphan Wisdom School in Canada, co-founded with his wife Nathalie Roy in 2010. Also a sought-after workshop leader, articulating matters of the heart, human suffering, confusions through ceremony.

He is the author of several influential books, including Money and the Soul’s Desires, Die Wise: A Manifesto for Sanity and Soul (2015), Come of Age: The Case for Elderhood in a Time of Trouble (2018), A Generation’s Worth: Spirit Work While the Crisis Reigns (2021), and Reckoning (2022), co-written with Kimberly Ann Johnson. His most recent book, Matrimony: Ritual, Culture, and the Heart’s Work, was released in August 2025. He is also involved in the musical project Nights of Grief & Mystery with singer-songwriter Gregory Hoskins, which has toured across North America, Europe, Australia, and New Zealand.

Subscribe now

Show Notes:

The Bone House of the Orphan Wisdom Enterprise
Matrimony: Ritual, Culture and the Heart’s Work
The Wedding Industry
Romantic Sameness and Psychic Withering
The Two Tribes
The Roots of Hospitality
The Pompous Ending of Hospitality
Debt, And the Estrangement of the Stranger
More Than Human Hospitality
The Alchemy of the Orphan Wisdom School

Homework:

Matrimony: Ritual, Culture, and the Heart’s Work | Purchase

Orphan Wisdom

The Scriptorium: Echoes of an Orphan Wisdom

Transcription:

Chris: This is an interview that I've been wondering about for a long time in part, because Stephen was the first person I ever interviewed for the End of Tourism Podcast. In Oaxaca, Mexico, where I live Stephen and Natalie were visiting and were incredibly, incredibly generous. Stephen, in offering his voice as a way to raise up my questions to a level that deserve to be contended with.

We spoke for about two and a half hours, if I remember correctly. And there was a lot in what you spoke to towards the second half of the interview that I think we're the first kind of iterations of the Matrimony book.

We spoke a little bit about the stranger and trade, and it was kind of startling as someone trying to offer their first interview and suddenly hearing something [00:01:00] that I'd never heard before from Stephen. Right. And so it was quite impressive. And I'm grateful to be here now with y'all and to get to wonder about this a little more deeply with you Stephen.

Stephen: Mm-hmm. Hmm.

Chris: This is also a special occasion for the fact that for the first time in the history of the podcast, we have a live audience among us today. Strange doings. Some scholars and some stewards and caretakers of the Orphan Wisdom enterprise. So, thank you all as well for coming tonight and being willing to listen and put your ears to this.

And so to begin, Stephen, I'm wondering if you'd be willing to let those who will be listening to this recording later on know where we're gathered in tonight?

Stephen: Well, we're in... what's the name of this township?

Nathalie: North Algona.

Stephen: North Algona township on the borders, an eastern gate [00:02:00] of Algonquin Park. Strangely named place, given the fact that they were the first casualties of the park being established. And we're in a place that never should have been cleared - my farm. It should never have been cleared of the talls, the white pines that were here, but the admiralty was in need back in the day. And that's what happened there. And we're in a place that the Irish immigrants who came here after the famine called "Tramore," which more or less means "good-frigging luck farming."

It doesn't technically mean that, but it absolutely means that. It actually means "sandy shore," which about covers the joint, and it's the only thing that covers the joint - would be sand. You have to import clay. Now, that's a joke in many farming places in the world, but if we wanted any clay, we'd have to bring it in and pay for the privilege.

And the farm has been in [00:03:00] my, my responsibility for about 25 years now, pretty close to that. And the sheep, or those of them left because the coyotes have been around for the first time in their casualty-making way... They're just out here, I'm facing the field where they're milling around.

And it's the very, very beginnings of the long cooling into cold, into frigid, which is our lot in this northern part of the hemisphere, even though it's still August, but it's clear that things have changed. And then, we're on a top of a little hill, which was the first place that I think that we may have convened a School here.

It was a tipi, which is really worked very well considering we didn't live here, so we could put it up and put it down in the same weekend. [00:04:00] And right on this very hill, we were, in the early days, and we've replaced that tipi with another kind of wooden structure. A lot more wood in this one.

This has been known as "The Teaching Hall" or "The Great Hall," or "The Hall" or "The Money Pit, as it was known for a little while, but it actually worked out pretty well. And it was I mean, people who've come from Scandinavia are knocked out by the kind of old-style, old-world visitation that the place seems to be to them.

And I'd never really been before I had the idea what this should look like, but I just went from a kind of ancestral memory that was knocking about, which is a little different than your preferences, you know. You have different kinds of preferences you pass through stylistically through your life, but the ones that lay claim to you are the ones that are not interested in your [00:05:00] preferences. They're interested in your kind of inheritance and your lineage.

So I'm more or less from the northern climes of Northern Europe, and so the place looks that way and I was lucky enough to still have my carving tools from the old days. And I've carved most of the beams and most of the posts that keep the place upright with a sort of sequence of beasts and dragons and ne'er-do-wells and very, very few humans, I think two, maybe, in the whole joint. Something like that. And then, mostly what festoons a deeply running human life is depicted here. And there's all kinds of stories, which I've never really sat down and spoken to at great length with anybody, but they're here.

And I do deeply favour the idea that one day [00:06:00] somebody will stumble into this field, and I suppose, upon the remains of where we sit right now, and wonder "What the hell got into somebody?" That they made this mountain of timber moldering away, and that for a while what must have been, and when they finally find the footprint of, you know, its original dimensions and sort of do the wild math and what must have been going on in this sandy field, a million miles in away from its home.

And wherever I am at that time, I'll be wondering the same thing.

Audience: Hmm.

Stephen: "What went on there?" Even though I was here for almost all of it. So, this was the home of the Orphan Wisdom School for more than a decade and still is the home of the Orphan Wisdom School, even if it's in advance, or in retreat [00:07:00] or in its doldrums. We'll see.

And many things besides, we've had weddings in here, which is wherein I discovered "old-order matrimony," as I've come to call it, was having its way with me in the same way that the design of the place did. And it's also a grainery for our storage of corn. Keep it up off the ground and out of the hands of the varmints, you know, for a while.

Well that's the beginning.

Chris: Hmm. Hmm. Thank you Stephen.

Stephen: Mm-hmm.

Chris: You were mentioning the tipi where the school began. I remember sleeping in there the first time I came here. Never would I have thought for a million years that I'd be sitting here with you.

Stephen: It's wild, isn't it?

Chris: 12 years later.

?: Yeah.

Chris: And so next, I'd like to do my best in part over the course of the next perhaps hour or two to congratulate you on the release of [00:08:00] your new book, Matrimony: Ritual, Culture, and the Heart's Work.

Stephen: Thank you.

Chris: Mm-hmm. I'm grateful to say like many others that I've received a copy and have lent my eyes to your good words, and what is really an incredible achievement.

For those who haven't had a chance to lay their eyes on it just yet, I'm wondering if you could let us in on why you wrote a book about matrimony in our time and where it stands a week out from its publication.

Stephen: Well, maybe the answer begins with the question, "why did you write a book, having done so before?" And you would imagine that the stuff that goes into writing a book, you'd think that the author has hopes for some kind of redemptive, redeeming outcome, some kind of superlative that drops out the back end of the enterprise.

And you know, this is [00:09:00] the seventh I've written. And I would have to say that's not really how it goes, and you don't really know what becomes of what you've written, even with the kind people who do respond, and the odd non-monetary prize that comes your way, which Die Wise gamed that.

But I suppose, I wrote, at all partly to see what was there. You know, I had done these weddings and I was a little bit loathe to let go, to let the weddings turn entirely into something historical, something that was past, even though I probably sensed pretty clearly that I was at the end of my willingness to subject myself to the slings and arrows that came along with the enterprise, but it's a sweet sorrow, or there's a [00:10:00] wonder that goes along with the tangle of it all. And so, I wrote to find out what happened, as strange as that might sound to you. You can say, "well, you were there, you kind of knew what happened." But yes, I was witness to the thing, but there's the act of writing a book gives you the opportunity to sort of wonder in three-dimensions and well, the other thing I should say is I was naive and figured that the outfit who had published the, more or less prior two books to this one, would kind of inevitably be drawn to the fact that same guy. Basically, same voice, new articulation. And I was dumbfounded to find out that they weren't. And so, it's sort of smarted, you know?

And I think what I did was I just set the whole [00:11:00] enterprise aside, partly to contend with the the depths of the disappointment in that regard, and also not wanting to get into the terrible fray of having to parse or paraphrase the book in some kind of elevator pitch-style to see if anybody else wanted to look at it. You know, such as my touchy sense of nobility sometimes, you know, that I just rather not be involved in the snarl of the marketplace any longer.

So, I withdrew and I just set it aside but it wasn't that content to be set, set aside. And you know, to the book's credit, it bothered me every once in a while. It wasn't a book at the point where I was actually trying to engineer it, you know, and, and give it some kind of structure. I had piles of paper on the floor representing the allegation of chapters, trying to figure out what the relationship was [00:12:00] between any of these things.

What conceivably should come before what. What the names of any of these things might be. Did they have an identity? Was I just imposing it? And all of that stuff I was going through at the same time as I was contending with a kind of reversal in fortune, personally. And so in part, it was a bit of a life raft to give me something to work on that I wouldn't have to research or dig around in the backyard for it and give me some sort of self-administered occupation for a while.

Finally, I think there's a parallel with the Die Wise book, in that when it came to Die Wise, I came up with what I came up with largely because, in their absolute darkest, most unpromising hours, an awful lot of dying people, all of whom are dead now, [00:13:00] let me in on some sort of breach in the, the house of their lives.

And I did feel that I had some obligation to them long-term, and that part of that obligation turned into writing Die Wise and touring and talking about that stuff for years and years, and making a real fuss as if I'd met them all, as if what happened is really true. Not just factually accurate, but deeply, abidingly, mandatorily true.

So, although it may be the situation doesn't sound as extreme, but the truth is, when a number of younger - than me - people came to me and asked me to do their weddings, I, over the kind of medium-term thereafter, felt a not dissimilar obligation that the events that ensued from all of that not [00:14:00] be entrusted entirely to those relatively few people who attended. You know, you can call them "an audience," although I hope I changed that. Or you could call them "witnesses," which I hope I made them that.

And see to it that there could be, not the authorized or official version of what happened, but to the view from here, so to speak, which is, as I sit where I am in the hall right now, I can look at the spot where I conducted much of this when I wasn't sacheting up and down the middle aisle where the trestle tables now are.

And I wanted to give a kind of concerted voice to that enterprise. And I say "concerted voice" to give you a feel for the fact that I don't think this is a really an artifact. It's not a record. It's a exhortation that employs the things that happened to suggest that even though it is the way it is [00:15:00] ritually, impoverished as it is in our time and place, it has been otherwise within recoverable time and history. It has.

And if that's true, and it is, then it seems to me at least is true that it could be otherwise again. And so, I made a fuss and I made a case based on that conviction.

There's probably other reasons I can't think of right now. Oh, being not 25 anymore, and not having that many more books in me, the kind of wear and tear on your psyche of imposing order on the ramble, which is your recollection, which has only so many visitations available in it. Right? You can only do that so many times, I think. And I'm not a born writing person, you know, I come to it maniacally when I [00:16:00] do, and then when it's done, I don't linger over it so much.

So then, when it's time to talk about it, I actually have to have a look, because the act of writing it is not the act of reading it. The act of writing is a huge delivery and deliverance at the same time. It's a huge gestation. And you can't do that to yourself, you know, over and over again, but you can take some chances, and look the thing in the eye. So, and I think some people who are there, they're kind of well-intended amongst them, will recognize themselves in the details of the book, beyond "this is what happened and so on." You know, they'll recognize themselves in the advocacy that's there, and the exhortations that are there, and the [00:17:00] case-making that I made and, and probably the praying because there's a good degree of prayerfulness in there, too.

That's why.

Chris: Thank you. bless this new one in the world. And what's the sense for you?

Stephen: Oh, yes.

Chris: It being a one-week old newborn. How's that landing in your days?

Stephen: Well, it's still damp, you know. It's still squeaky, squeaky and damp. It's walking around like a newborn primate, you know, kind of swaying in the breeze and listening to port or to starboard according to whatever's going on.

I don't know that it's so very self-conscious in the best sense of that term, yet. Even though I recorded the audio version, I don't think [00:18:00] it's my voice is found every nook and cranny at this point, yet. So, it's kind of new. It's not "news," but it is new to me, you know, and it's very early in terms of anybody responding to it.

I mean, nobody around me has really taken me aside and say, "look, now I want to tell you about this book you wrote." It hasn't happened, and we'll see if it does, but I've done a few events on the other side of the ocean and hear so far, very few, maybe handful of interviews. And those are wonderful opportunities to hear something of what you came up with mismanaged by others, you know, misapprehend, you could say by others.

No problem. I mean, it's absolutely no problem. And if you don't want that to happen, don't talk, don't write anything down. So, I don't mind a bit, you know, and the chances are very good that it'll turn into things I didn't have in mind [00:19:00] as people take it up, and regard their own weddings and marriages and plans and schemes and fears and, you know, family mishigas and all the rest of it through this particular lens, you know. They may pick up a pen or a computer (it's an odd expression, "pick up a computer"), and be in touch with me and let me know. "Yeah, that was, we tried it" or whatever they're going to do, because, I mean, maybe Die Wise provided a bit of an inkling of how one might be able to proceed otherwise in their dying time or in their families or their loved ones dying time.

This is the book that most readily lends itself to people translating into something they could actually do, without a huge kind of psychic revolution or revolt stirring in them, at least not initially. This is as close as I come, probably, to writing a sequence of things [00:20:00] that could be considered "add-ons" to what people are already thinking about, that I don't force everybody else outta the house in order to make room for the ideas that are in the book. That may happen, anyway, but it wasn't really the intent. The intent was to say, you know, we are in those days when we're insanely preoccupied with the notion of a special event. We are on the receiving end of a considerable number of shards showing up without any notion really about what these shards remember or are memories of. And that's the principle contention I think that runs down the spine of the book, is that when we undertake matrimony, however indelicately, however by rote, you know, however mindlessly we may do it, [00:21:00] inadvertently, we call upon those shards nonetheless.

And they're pretty unspectacular if you don't think about them very deeply, like the rice or confetti, like the aisle, like the procession up the aisle, like the giving away of someone, like the seating arrangement, like the spectacle seating arrangement rather than the ritual seating arrangement.

And I mean, there's a fistful of them. And they're around and scholars aside maybe, nobody knows why they do them. Everybody just knows, "this is what a wedding is," but nobody knows why. And because nobody knows why, nobody really seems to know what a wedding is for, although they do proceed like they would know a wedding if they saw one. So, I make this a question to be really wondered about, and the shards are a way in. They're the kind of [00:22:00] breadcrumb trail through the forest. They're the little bits of broken something, which if you begin to handle just three or four of them, and kind of fit them together, and find something of the original shape and inflection of the original vessel, kind of enunciates, begins to murmur in your hands, and from it you can begin to infer some three-dimensionality to the original shape. And from the sense of the shape, you get a set sense of contour, and from the sense of contour, you get a sense of scale or size. And from that you get a sense of purpose, or function, or design. And from that you get a sense of some kind of serious magisterial insight into some of the fundament of human being that was manifest in the "old-order matrimony," [00:23:00] as I came to call it.

So, who wouldn't wanna read that book?

Chris: Mm-hmm.

Thank you. Mm-hmm. Thank you, Stephen. Yeah. It reminds me, just before coming up here, maybe two weeks ago, I was in attending a wedding. And there was a host or mc, and initially just given what I was hearing over the microphone, it was hard to tell if he was hired or family or friends. And it turned out he was, in fact, a friend of the groom. And throughout the night he proceeded to take up that role as a kind of comedian.

Audience: Mm-hmm.

Chris: This was the idea, I guess. Mm-hmm. And he was buzzing and mumbling and swearing into the microphone, [00:24:00] and then finally minimizing the only remnant of traditional culture that showed up in the wedding. And his thing was, okay, so when can we get to the part where it's boom, boom, boom, right. And shot, shot, shot, whatever.

Stephen: Right.

Chris: There was so much that came up in my memories in part because I worked about a decade in Toronto in the wedding industry.

Mm-hmm. Hospitality industry. Maybe a contradiction in terms, there. And there was one moment that really kind of summed it up. I kept coming back to this reading the book because it was everything that you wrote seemed to not only antithetical to this moment, but also an antidote.

Anyways, it was in North Toronto and the [00:25:00] owner of the venue - it was a kind of movie theatre turned event venue - and there was a couple who was eventually going to get married there. They came in to do their tasting menu to see what they wanted to put on the menu for the dinner, for their wedding.

And the owner was kind of this mafioso type. And he comes in and he sees them and he walks over and he says, "so, you're gonna get married at my wedding factory."

Audience: Mm-hmm.

Chris: In all sincerity.

Stephen: Mm-hmm.

Chris: Right.

Without skipping a beat. Could you imagine?

Stephen: Yeah.

I could. I sure could.

Chris: Yeah. Yeah.

Stephen: I mean, don't forget, if these people weren't doing what the people wanted, they'd be outta business.

Audience: Mm-hmm.

Stephen: No, that's the thing. This is aiding and abetting. This is sleeping with the enemy, stylistically-speaking. [00:26:00] The fact that people "settle" (that's the term I would use for it), settle for this, the idea being that this somehow constitutes the most honest and authentic through line available to us is just jaw dropping. When you consider what allegedly this thing is supposed to be for. I mean, maybe we'll get into this, but I'll just leave this as a question for now. What is that moment allegedly doing?

Not, what are the people in it allegedly doing? The moment itself, what is it? How is it different from us sitting here now talking about it? And how is it different from the gory frigging jet-fuelled aftermath of excess. And how's it different from the cursing alleged master of ceremonies? How can you [00:27:00] tell none of those things belong to this thing?

And why do you have such a hard time imagining what does

Audience: Hmm mm

Chris: Well that leads me to my next question.

Stephen: Ah, you're welcome.

Chris: So, I've pulled a number of quotes from the book to read from over the course of the interview. And this one for anyone who's listening is on page 150. And you write Stephen,

"Spiritually-speaking, most of the weddings in our corner of the world are endogamous affairs, inward-looking. What is, to me, most unnerving is that they can be spiritually-incestuous. The withering of psychic difference between people is the program of globalization. It is in the architecture of most things partaking of the internet, and it is in the homogeneity of our matrimony. [00:28:00] It is this very incestuous that matrimony was once crafted and entered into to avoid and subvert. Now, it grinds upon our differences until they are details.

And so, this paragraph reminded me of a time in my youth when I seemed to be meeting couples who very eerily looked like each other. No blood or extended kin relation whatsoever, and yet they had very similar faces. And so as I get older, this kind of face fidelity aside, I continue to notice that people looking for companionship tend to base their search on similitude, on shared interests, customs, experiences, shared anything and everything. This, specifically, in opposition to those on the other side of the aisle or spectrum, to difference or divergence. And so, opposites don't attract anymore. I'm curious what you think this psychic [00:29:00] withering does to an achieve understanding of matrimony.

Stephen: Well, I mean, let's wonder what it does to us, generally, first before we get to matrimony, let's say. It demonizes. Maybe that's too strong, but it certainly reconstitutes difference as some kind of affliction, some kind of not quite good enough, some kind of something that has to be overcome or overwhelmed on the road to, to what? On the road to sameness? So, if that's the goal, then are all of the differences between us, aberrations of some kind, if that's the goal? If that's the goal, are all the [00:30:00] differences between us, not God-given, but humanly misconstrued or worse? Humanly wrought? Do the differences between us conceivably then belong at all? Or is the principle object of the entire endeavor to marry yourself, trying to put up with the vague differences that the other person represents to you?

I mean, I not very jokingly said years ago, that I coined a phrase that went something like "the compromise of infinity, which is other people." What does that mean? "The compromise of infinity, which is other people." Not to mention it's a pretty nice T-shirt. But what I meant by the [00:31:00] phrase is this: when you demonize difference in this fashion or when you go the other direction and lionize sameness, then one of the things that happens is that compromise becomes demonized, too. Compromise, by definition, is something you never should have done, right? Compromise is how much you surrender of yourself in order to get by. That's what all these things become. And before you know it, you're just beaten about the head and shoulders about "codependence" and you know, not being "true to yourself" as if being true to yourself is some kind of magic.

I mean, the notion that "yourself is the best part of you" is just hilarious. I mean, when you think about it, like who's running amuck if yourself is what you're supposed to be? I ask you. Like, who's [00:32:00] doing the harm? Who's going mental if the self is such a good idea? So, of course, I'm maintaining here that I'm not persuaded that there is such a thing.

I think it's a momentary lapse in judgment to have a self and to stick to it. That's the point I'm really making to kind of reify it until it turns ossified and dusty and bizarrely adamant like that estranged relative that lives in the basement of your house. Bizarrely, foreignly adamant, right? Like the house guest who just won't fuck off kind of thing.

Okay, so "to thine own self be true," is it? Well, try being true to somebody else's self for ten minutes. Try that. [00:33:00] That's good at exercise for matrimony - being true to somebody else's self. You'll discover that their selves are not made in heaven, either. Either. I underscore it - either.

I've completely lost track of the question you asked me.

Chris: What are the consequences of the sameness on this anti-cultural sameness, and the program of it for an achieved understanding of matrimony.

Stephen: Thank you. Well, I will fess up right now. I do so in the book. That's a terrible phrase. I swear I'd never say such a thing. "In my book... I say the following," but in this case, it's true. I did say this. I realized during the writing of it that I had made a tremendous tactical error in the convening of the event as I did it over the years, [00:34:00] and this is what it came to.

I was very persuaded at the time of the story that appears in the chapter called "Salt and Indigo" in the book. I was very, very persuaded. I mean, listen, I made up the story (for what it's worth), okay, but I didn't make it up out of nothing. I made it up out of a kind of tribal memory that wouldn't quite let go.

And in it, I was basically saying, here's these two tribes known principally for what they trade in and what they love most emphatically. They turn out to be the same thing. And I describe a circumstance in which they exchange things in a trade scenario, not a commerce scenario. And I'm using the chapter basically to make the case that matrimony's architecture derives in large measure from the sacraments of trade as manifest in that story. [00:35:00] Okay. And this is gonna sound obvious, but the fundamental requirement of the whole conceit that I came up with is that there are two tribes. Well, I thought to myself, "of course, there's always two tribes" at the time. And the two tribe-ness is reflected in when you come to the wedding site, you're typically asked (I hope you're still asked) " Are you family or friend of the groom or friend of the bride?" And you're seated "accordingly," right? That's the nominal, vestigial shard of this old tribal affiliation, that people came from over the rise, basically unknown to each other, to arrive at the kind of no man's land of matrimony, and proceeded accordingly. So, I put these things into motion in this very room and I sat people accordingly facing each other, not facing the alleged front of the room. [00:36:00] And of course, man, nobody knew where to look, because you raised your eyes and shit. There's just humans across from you, just scads of them who you don't freaking know. And there's something about doing that to North Americas that just throws them. So, they're just looking at each other and then looking away, and looking at each other and looking away, and wondering what they're doing here and what it's for. And I'm going back and forth for three hours, orienting them as to what is is coming.

Okay, so what's the miscalculation that I make? The miscalculation I made was assuming that by virtue of the seating arrangement, by virtue of me reminding them of the salt and indigo times, by virtue of the fact that they had a kind of allegiance of some sort or another to the people who are, for the moment, betrothed, that those distinctions and those affiliations together would congeal them, and constitute a [00:37:00] kind of tribal affiliation that they would intuitively be drawn towards as you would be drawn to heat on a cold winter's night.

Only to discover, as I put the thing into motion that I was completely wrong about everything I just told you about. The nature of my error was this, virtually all of those people on one side of the room were fundamentally of the same tribe as the people on the other side of the room, apropos of your question, you see. They were card carrying members of the gray dominant culture of North America. Wow. The bleached, kind of amorphous, kind of rootless, ancestor-free... even regardless of whether their people came over in the last generation from the alleged old country. It doesn't really claim them.[00:38:00]

There were two tribes, but I was wrong about who they were. That was one tribe. Virtually everybody sitting in the room was one tribe.

So, who's the other tribe? Answer is: me and the four or five people who were in on the structural delivery of this endeavour with me. We were the other tribe.

We didn't stand a chance, you see?

And I didn't pick up on that, and I didn't cast it accordingly and employ that, instead. I employed the conceit that I insisted was manifest and mobilized in the thing, instead of the manifest dilemma, which is that everybody who came knew what a wedding was, and me and four or five other people were yet to know if this could be one. That was the tribal difference, if you [00:39:00] will.

So, it was kind of invisible, wasn't it? Even to me at the time. Or, I say, maybe especially to me at the time. And so, things often went the way they went, which was for however much fascination and willingness to consider that there might have been in the room, there was quite a bit more either flat affect and kind of lack of real fascination, or curiosity, or sometimes downright hostility and pushback. Yeah.

So, all of that comes from the fact that I didn't credit as thoroughly as I should have done, the persistence in Anglo-North America of a kind of generic sameness that turned out to be what most people came here ancestrally to become. "Starting again" is recipe for culture [00:40:00] loss of a catastrophic order. The fantasy of starting again. Right?

And we've talked about that in your podcast, and you and I have talked about it privately, apropos of your own family and everybody's sitting in this room knows what I'm talking about. And when does this show up? Does it show up, oh, when you're walking down the street? Does it show up when you're on the mountaintop? Does it show up in your peak experiences? And the answer is "maybe." It probably shows up most emphatically in those times when you have a feeling that something special is supposed to be so, and all you can get from the "supposed to" is the allegation of specialness.

Audience: Mm-hmm.

Stephen: And then, you look around in the context of matrimony and you see a kind of febral, kind of strained, the famous bridezilla stuff, all of that stuff. [00:41:00] You saw it in the hospitality industry, no doubt. You know, the kind of mania for perfection, as if perfection constitutes culture. Right? With every detail checked off in the checkbox, that's culture. You know, as if everything goes off without a hitch and there's no guffaws. And in fact, anybody could reasonably make the case, "Where do you think culture appears when the script finally goes fucking sideways?" That's when. And when you find out what you're capable of, ceremonially.

And generally speaking, I think most people discovered that their ceremonial illiteracy bordered on the bottomless.

That's when you find out. Hmm.

Chris: Wow.

Stephen: Yeah. And that's why people, you know, in speech time, they reach in there and get that piece of paper, and just look at it. Mm-hmm. They don't even look up, terrified that they're gonna go off script for a minute as [00:42:00] if the Gods of Matrimony are a scripted proposition.

Chris: Mm-hmm. Yeah. Thank you for sharing that with us, that degree of deep reflection and humility that I'm sure comes with it.

Stephen: Mea Culpa, baby. Yeah, I was, I got that one totally wrong. Mm-hmm. And I didn't know it at the time. Meanwhile, like, how much can you transgress and have the consequences of doing so like spill out across the floor like a broken thermometer's mercury and not wise up.

But of course, I was as driven as anybody. I was as driven to see if I could come through with what I promised to do the year before. And keeping your promise can make you into a maniac.

Audience: Hmm hmm.

Chris: But I imagine that, you [00:43:00] know, you wouldn't have been able to see that even years later if you didn't say yes in the first place.

Stephen: Oh, yeah. Yeah. And I wouldn't have been able to make the errors.

Chris: Right.

Stephen: Right. Yeah. I mean, as errors go, this is not a mortal sin. Right, right. And you could chalk it up to being a legitimate miscalculation. Well, so? All I'm saying is, it turns out I was there too, and it turns out, even though I was allegedly the circus master of the enterprise, I wasn't free and clear of the things we were all contending with, the kind of mortality and sort of cultural ricketiness that were all heirs to. That's how I translated it, as it turns out.

So, PS there was a moment, [00:44:00] which I don't remember which setting it was now, but there was a moment when the "maybe we'll see if she becomes a bride" bride's mother slid up to me during the course of the proceedings, and in a kind of stage whisper more or less hissed me as follows.

"Is this a real wedding?"

I mean, that's not a question. Not in that setting, obviously not. That is an accusation. Right. And a withering one at that. And there was a tremendous amount of throw-down involved.

So, was it? I mean, what we do know is that she did not go to any of the weddings [00:45:00] that she was thinking of at the time, and go to the front of the room where the celebrant is austerely standing there with the book, or the script, or the well-intentioned, or the self-penned vows and never hissed at him or her, "is this a real wedding?"

Never once did she do that. We know that.

Right.

And I think we know why. But she was fairly persuaded she knew what a real wedding was. And all she was really persuaded by was the poverty of the weddings that she'd attended before that one. Well, I was as informed in that respect as she was, wasn't I? I just probably hadn't gone to as many reprobate weddings as she had, so she had more to deal with than I did, even though I was in the position of the line of fire.

And I didn't respond too well to the question, I have to say. At the moment, I was rather combative. But I mean, you try to do [00:46:00] what I tried to do and not have a degree of fierceness to go along with your discernment, you know, just to see if you can drag this carcass across the threshold. Anyway, that happened too.

Chris: Wow. Yeah. Dominant culture of North America.

Stephen: Heard of it.

Chris: Yeah. Well, in Matrimony, there's quite a bit in which you write about hospitality and radical hospitality. And I wanted to move in that direction a little bit, because in terms of these kind of marketplace rituals or ceremonies that you were mentioning you know, it's something that we might wonder, I think, as you have, how did it come to be this [00:47:00] way?

And so I'd like to, if I can once again, quote from matrimony in which you speak to the etymology of hospitality. And so for those interested on page 88,

"the word hospitality comes from hospitaller, meaning 'one who cares for the afflicted, the infirm, the needy.' There's that thread of our misgivings about being on the receiving end of hospitality. Pull on it. For the written history of the word, at least, it has meant, 'being on the receiving end of a kind of care you'd rather not need.'"

End quote.

Stephen: That's so great. I mean, before you go on with the quote. It's so great to know that the word, unexamined, just kind of leaks upside, doesn't it? Hospitality, I mean, nobody goes "Hospitality, ew." [00:48:00] And then, if you just quietly do the obvious math to yourself, there's so much awkwardness around hospitality.

This awkwardness must have an origin, have a home. There must be some misgiving that goes along with the giving of hospitality, mustn't there be? How else to understand where that kind of ickiness is to be found. Right? And it turns out that the etymology is giving you the beginnings of a way of figuring it out what it is that you're on the receiving end of - a kind of succor that you wish you didn't need, which is why it's the root word for "hospital."

Chris: Hmm hmm. Wow.

Audience: Hmm.

Chris: May I repeat that sentence please? Once more.

"For the written history of the word, at least, it has meant, [00:49:00] 'being on the receiving end of a kind of care you'd rather not need.'"

And so this last part hits home for me as I imagine it does for many.

And it feels like the orthodoxy of hospitality in our time is one based not only in transaction, but in debt. And if you offer hospitality to me, then I owe you hospitality.

Stephen: Right.

Chris: I'm indebted to you. And we are taught, in our time, that the worst thing to be in is in debt.

Stephen: Right?

Chris: And so people refuse both the desire to give as well as the learning skill of receiving. And this is continuing on page 88 now.

"But there's mystery afoot with this word. In its old Latin form, hospice meant both 'host' and 'guest.'"

Stephen: Amazing. One. Either one, This is absolutely amazing. We're fairly sure that there's a [00:50:00] acres of difference between the giver of hospitality and the receiver that the repertoire is entirely different, that the skew between them is almost insurmountable, that they're not interchangeable in any way. But the history of the word immediately says, "really?" The history of the word, without question, says that "host" and "guest" are virtually the same, sitting in different places, being different people, more or less joined at the hip. I'll say more, but you go ahead with what you were gonna do. Sure.

Chris: "In it's proto Indo-European origins, hospitality and hospice is a compound word: gosh + pot. And it meant something like [00:51:00] 'stranger/guest/host + powerful Lord.'

It is amazing to me that ancestrally, the old word for guest, host, and stranger were all the same word. Potent ceremonial business, this is. In those days, the server and the serve were partners in something mysterious. This could be confusing, but only if you think of guest, host, and stranger as fixed identities.

If you think of them as functions, as verbs, the confusion softens and begins to clear. The word hospice in its ancient root is telling us that each of the people gathered together in hospitality is bound to the others by formal etiquette, yes, but the bond is transacted through a subtle scheme of graces.

Hospitality, it tells us, is a web of longing and belonging that binds people for a time, some hithereto unknown to each other is a clutch of mutually-binding elegances, you could say. In its ancient practice, [00:52:00] hospitality was a covenant. According to that accord, however we were with each other. That was how the Gods would be with us. We learn our hospitality by being on the receiving end of Godly administration. That's what giving thanks for members. We proceed with our kin in imitation of that example and in gratitude for it."

Mm-hmm.

And so today, among "secular" people, with the Gods ignored, this old-time hospitality seems endangered, if not fugitive. I'm curious how you imagine that this rupture arose, the ones that separated and commercialized the radical relationships between hosts and guests, that turned them from verbs to nouns and something like strangers to marketplace functions.[00:53:00]

Stephen: Well, of course this is a huge question you've asked, and I'll see if I can unhuge it a bit.

Chris: Uhhuh.

Stephen: Let's go right to the heart of what happened. Just no preliminaries, just right to it.

So, to underscore again, the beauty of the etymology. I've told you over and over again, the words will not fail you. And this is just a shining example, isn't it? That the fraternization is a matter of ceremonial alacrity that the affiliation between host and guest, which makes them partners in something, that something is the [00:54:00] evocation of a third thing that's neither one of them. It's the thing they've lent themselves to by virtue of submitting to being either a host or a guest. One.

Two. You could say that in circumstances of high culture or highly-functioning culture, one of the principle attributes of that culture is that the fundament of its understanding, is that only with the advent of the stranger in their midst that the best of them comes forward.

Okay, follow that. Yeah.

So, this is a little counterintuitive for those of us who don't come from such places. We imagine that the advent of strangers in the midst of the people I'm describing would be an occasion where people hide their [00:55:00] best stuff away until the stranger disappears, and upon the disappearance of the stranger, the good stuff comes out again.

You know?

So, I'm just remembering just now, there's a moment in the New Testament where Jesus says something about the best wine and he's coming from exactly this page that we're talking about - not the page in the book, but this understanding. He said, you know, "serve your best wine first," unlike the standard, that prevails, right?

So again, what a stranger does in real culture is call upon the cultural treasure of the host's culture, and provides the opportunity for that to come forward, right? By which you can understand... Let's say for simplicity's sake, there's two kinds of hospitality. There's probably all kinds of gradations, [00:56:00] but for the purposes of responding to what you've asked, there's two.

One of them is based on kinship. Okay? So, family meal. So, everybody knows whose place is whose around the table, or it doesn't matter - you sit wherever you want. Or, when we're together, we speak shorthand. That's the shorthand of familiarity and affinity, right?

Everybody knows what everybody's talking about. A lot of things get half-said or less, isn't it? And there's a certain fineness, isn't it? That comes with that kind of affinity. Of course, there is, and I'm not diminishing it at all. I'm just characterizing it as being of a certain frequency or calibre or charge. And the charge is that it trades on familiarity. It requires that. There's that kind of hospitality.

"Oh, sit wherever you want."

Remember this one?[00:57:00]

"We don't stand on ceremony here."

"Oh, you're one of the family now." I just got here. What, what?

But, of course, you can hear in the protestations the understanding, in that circumstance, that formality is an enemy to feeling good in this moment, isn't it? It feels stiff and starched and uncalled for or worse.

It feels imported from elsewhere. It doesn't feel friendly. So, I'm giving you now beginnings of a differentiation between how cultures who really function as cultures understand what it means to be hospitable and what often prevails today, trading is a kind of low-grade warfare conducted against the strangeness of the stranger.

The whole purpose of treating somebody like their family is to mitigate, and finally neutralize their [00:58:00] strangeness, so that for the purposes of the few hours in front of us all, there are no strangers here. Right? Okay.

Then there's another kind, and intuitively you can feel what I'm saying. You've been there, you know exactly what I mean.

There's another kind of circumstance where the etiquette that prevails is almost more emphatic, more tangible to you than the familiar one. That's the one where your mother or your weird aunt or whoever she might be, brings out certain kind of stuff that doesn't come out every day. And maybe you sit in a room that you don't often sit in. And maybe what gets cooked is stuff you haven't seen in a long time. And some part of you might be thinking, "What the hell is all this about?" And the answer is: it's about that guy in the [00:59:00] corner that you don't know.

And your own ancestral culture told acres of stories whose central purpose was to convey to outsiders their understanding of what hospitality was. That is fundamentally what The Iliad and The Odyssey are often returning to and returning to and returning to.

They even had a word for the ending of the formal hospitality that accrued, that arose around the care and treatment of strangers. It was called pomp or pompe, from which we get the word "pompous." And you think about what the word "pompous" means today.

It means "nose in the air," doesn't it? Mm-hmm. It means "thinks really highly of oneself," isn't it? And it means "useless, encumbering, kind of [01:00:00] artificial kind of going through the motions stuff with a kind of aggrandizement for fun." That's what "pompous" means. Well, the people who gave us the word didn't mean that at all. This word was the word they used to describe the particular moment of hospitality when it was time for the stranger to leave.

And when it was mutually acknowledged that the time for hospitality has come to an end, and the final act of hospitality is to accompany the stranger out of the house, out of the compound, out into the street, and provision them accordingly, and wish them well, and as is oftentimes practiced around here, standing in the street and waving them long after they disappear from view.

This is pompous. This is what it actually means. Pretty frigging cool when you get corrected once in a while, isn't it? [01:01:00] Yeah.

So, as I said, to be simplistic about it, there's at least a couple of kinds, and one of them treasures the advent of the stranger, understanding it to be the detonation point for the most elegant part of us to come forward.

Now, those of us who don't come from such a place, we're just bamboozled and Shanghai'ed by the notion of formality, which we kind of eschew. You don't like formality when it comes to celebration, as if these two things are hostile, one to the other. But I'd like you to consider the real possibility that formality is grace under pressure, and that formality is there to give you a repertoire of response that rescues you from the gross limitations of your autobiography.[01:02:00]

Next question. I mean, that's the beginning.

Chris: Absolutely. Absolutely. Mm-hmm. Thank you once again, Stephen. So alongside the term or concept of "pompe," in which the the guest or stranger was led out of the house or to the entrance of the village, there was also the consideration around the enforcement of hospitality, which you write about in the book. And you write that

"the enforcement of hospitality runs the palpable risk of violating or undoing the cultural value it is there to advocate for. Forcing people to share their good fortune with the less fortunate stretches, to the point of undoing the generosity of spirit that the culture holds dear. Enforcement of hospitality is a sign of the eclipse of hospitality, typically spawned by insecurity, contracted self-definition, and the darkening of the [01:03:00] stranger at the door.

Instead, such places and times are more likely to encourage the practice of hospitality in subtle generous ways, often by generously treating the ungenerous."

And so there seems to be a need for limits placed on hospitality, in terms of the "pompe," the maximum three days in which a stranger can be given hospitality, and concurrently a need to resist enforcing hospitality. This seems like a kind of high-wire act that hospitable cultures have to balance in order to recognize and realize an honorable way of being with a stranger. And so I'm wondering if you could speak to the possibility of how these limits might be practiced without being enforced. What might that look like in a culture that engages with, with such limits, but without prohibitions?

Stephen: Mm-hmm. That's a very good question. [01:04:00] Well, I think your previous question was what happened? I think, in a nutshell, and I didn't really answer that, so maybe see how I can use this question to answer the one that you asked before: what happened? So, there's no doubt in my mind that something happened that it's kind of demonstrable, if only with the benefit of hindsight.

Audience: Right.

Stephen: Or we can feel our way around the edges of the absence of the goneness of that thing that gives us some feel for the original shape of that thing.

So you could say I'm trafficking in "ideals," here, and after a fashion, maybe, yeah. But the notion of "ideals," when it's used in this slanderous way suggests that "it was never like that."

Chris: Mm-hmm.

Stephen: And I suggest to you it's been like that in a lot of places, and there's a lot of places where it's still like that, although globalization [01:05:00] may be the coup de grâce performed upon this capacity. Okay. But anyway.

Okay. So what happened? Well, you see in the circumstance that I described, apropos of the stranger, the stranger is in on it. The stranger's principle responsibility is to be the vector for this sort of grandiose generosity coming forward, and to experience that in a burdensome and unreciprocated fashion, until you realize that their willingness to do that is their reciprocity. Everybody doesn't get to do everything at once. You can't give and receive at the same time. You know what that's called? "Secret Santa at school," isn't it?

That's where nobody owes nobody nothing at the end. That's what we're all after. I mean, one of your questions, you know, pointed to that, that there's a kind of, [01:06:00] what do you call that, teeter-totter balance between what people did for each other and what they received for each other. Right. And nobody feels slighted in any way, perfect balance, et cetera.

Well, the circumstance here has nothing of the kind going with it. The circumstance we're describing now is one in which the hospitality is clearly unequal in terms of who's eating whose food, for example, in terms of the absolutely frustrated notion of reciprocity, that in fact you undo your end of the hospitality by trying to pay back, or give back, or pay at all, or break even, or not feel the burden of "God, you've been on the take for fricking hours here now." And if you really look in the face of the host, I mean, they're just getting started and you can't, you can't take it anymore.[01:07:00]

So, one of the ways that we contend with this is through habits of speech. So, if somebody comes around with seconds. They say, "would you like a little more?"

And you say, "I'm good. I'm good. I'm good." You see, "I'm good" is code for what? "Fuck off." That's what it's code for. It's a little strong. It's a little strong. What I mean is, when "I'm good" comes to town, it means I don't need you and what you have. Good God, you're not there because you need it you knucklehead. You're there because they need it, because their culture needs an opportunity to remember itself. Right?

Okay. So what happened? Because you're making it sound like a pretty good thing, really. Like who would say, "I think we've had enough of this hospitality thing, don't you? Let's try, oh, [01:08:00] keeping our shit to ourselves. That sounds like a good alternative. Let's give it a week or two, see how it rolls." Never happened. Nobody decided to do this - this change, I don't think. I think the change happened, and sometime long after people realized that the change had had taken place. And it's very simple. The change, I think, went something like this.

As long as the guest is in on it, there's a shared and mutually-held understanding that doesn't make them the same. It makes them to use the quote from the book "partners," okay, with different tasks to bring this thing to light, to make it so. What does that require? A mutually-held understanding in vivo as it's happening, what it is.

Okay. [01:09:00] So, that the stranger who's not part of the host culture... sorry, let me say this differently.

The culture of the stranger has made the culture of the host available to the stranger no matter how personally adept he or she may be at receiving. Did you follow that?

Audience: A little.

Stephen: Okay. Say it again?

Audience: Yes, please.

Stephen: Okay. The acculturation, the cultured sophistication of the stranger is at work in his or her strangerhood. Okay. He or she's not at home, but their cultural training helps them understand what their obligations are in terms of this arrangement we've been describing here.

Okay, so I think the rupture takes place [01:10:00] when the culturation of one side or the other fails to make the other discernible to the one.

One more time?

When something happens whereby the acculturation of one of the partners makes the identity, the presence, and the valence of the other one untranslatable. Untranslatable.

I could give you an example from what I call " the etiquette of trade," or the... what was the word? Not etiquette. What's the other word?

Chris: The covenant?

Stephen: Okay, " covenant of trade" we'll call it. So, imagine that people are sitting across from each other, two partners in a trade. Okay? [01:11:00] Imagine that they have one thing to sell or move or exchange and somebody has something else.

How does this work? Not "what are the mechanics?" That can be another discussion, but, if this works, how does it work? Not "how does it happen?" How does it actually achieve what they're after? Maybe it's something like this.

I have this pottery, and even though you're not a potter, but somebody in your extended family back home was, and you watched what they went through to make a fricking pot, okay?

You watched how their hands seized up, because the clay leached all the moisture out of the hands. You distinctly remember that - how the old lady's hands looked cracked and worn, and so from the work of making vessels of hospitality, okay? [01:12:00] It doesn't matter that you didn't make it yourself. The point is you recognize in the item something we could call "cultural patrimony."

You recognize the deep-runningness of the culture opposite you as manifest and embodied in this item for trade. Okay? So, the person doesn't have to "sell you" because your cultural sophistication makes this pot on the other side available to you for the deeply venerable thing that it is. Follow what I'm saying?

Okay. So, you know what I'm gonna say next? When something happens, the items across from you cease to speak, cease to have their stories come along with them, cease to be available. There's something about your cultural atrophy that you project onto the [01:13:00] item that you don't recognize.

You don't recognize it's valence, it's proprieties, it's value, it's deep-running worth and so on. Something happened, okay? And because you're not making your own stuff back home or any part of it. And so now, when you're in a circumstance like this and you're just trying to get this pot, but you know nothing about it, then the enterprise becomes, "Okay, so what do you have to part with to obtain the pot?"

And the next thing is, you pretend you're not interested in obtaining the pot to obtain the pot. That becomes part of the deal. And then, the person on the making end feels the deep running slight of your disinterest, or your vague involvement in the proceedings, or maybe the worst: when it's not things you're going back and forth with, but there's a third thing called money, which nobody makes, [01:14:00] which you're not reminded of your grandma or anyone else's with the money. And then, money becomes the ghost of the original understanding of the cultural patrimony that sat between you. That's what happened, I'm fairly sure: the advent, the estrangement that comes with the stranger, instead of the opportunity to be your cultural best when the stranger comes.

And then of course, it bleeds through all kinds of transactions beyond the "obvious material ones." So, it's a rupture in translatability, isn't it?

Chris: You understand this to happen or have happened historically, culturally, et cetera, with matrimony as well?

Stephen: Oh, absolutely. Yeah.

Yeah. This is why, for example, things like the fetishization of virginity.

Audience: Mm-hmm. [01:15:00]

Stephen: I think it's traceable directly to what we're talking about. How so? Oh, this is a whole other long thing, but the very short version would be this.

Do you really believe that through all of human history until the recent liberation, that people have forever fetishized the virginity of a young woman and jealously defended it, the "men" in particular, and that it became a commodity to trade back and forth in, and that it had to be prodded and poked at to determine its intactness? And this was deemed to be, you know, honourable behavior?

Do you really think that's the people you come from, that they would've do that to the most cherished of their [01:16:00] own, barely pubescent girls? Come on now. I'm not saying it didn't happen and doesn't still happen. I'm not saying that. I'm saying, God almighty, something happened for that to be so.

And I'm trying to allude to you now what I think took place. Then all of a sudden, the hymen takes the place of the pottery, doesn't it? And it becomes universally translatable. Doesn't it? It becomes a kind of a ghosted artifact of a culturally-intact time. It's as close as you can get.

Hence, this allegation of its purity, or the association with purity, and so on. [01:17:00] I mean, there's lots to say, but that gives you a feel for what might have happened there.

Chris: Thank you, Stephen. Thank you for being so generous with your considerations here.

Stephen: You see why I had to write a book, eh?

Audience: Mm-hmm.

Stephen: There was too much bouncing around. Like I had to just keep track of my own thoughts on the matter.

But can you imagine all of this at play in the year, oh, I don't know, 2022, trying to put into motion a redemptive passion play called "matrimony," with all of this at play? Not with all of this in my mind, but with all of this actually disfiguring the anticipation of the proceedings for the people who came.

Can you imagine? Can you imagine trying to pull it off, and [01:18:00] contending overtly with all these things and trying to make room for them in a moment that's supposed to be allegedly - get ready for it - happy.

I should have raised my rates on the first day, trying to pull that off.

But anyway.

Okay, you go now,

Chris: Maybe now you'll have the opportunity.

Stephen: No, man. No. I'm out of the running for that. "Pompe" has come and come and gone. Mm.

Chris: So, in matrimony, Stephen, you write that

"the brevity, the brevity of modern ceremonies is really there to make sure that nothing happens, nothing of substance, nothing of consequence, no alchemy, no mystery, no crazy other world stuff. That overreach there in its scripted heart tells me that deep in the rayon-wrapped bosom of that special day, the modern wedding is scared [01:19:00] silly of something happening. That's because it has an ages-old abandoned memory of a time when a wedding was a place where the Gods came around, where human testing and trying and making was at hand, when the dead lingered in the wings awaiting their turn to testify and inveigh."

Gorgeous. Gorgeous.

Audience: Mm-hmm.

Chris: And so I'm curious if

Stephen: "Rayon-wrapped bosom." That's not, that's not shabby.

Chris: "Rayon-wrapped bosom of that special day." Yeah.

So, I'm curious do you think the more-than-human world practices matrimony, and if so, what, if anything, might you have learned about matrimony from the more-than-human world?

Stephen: I would say the reverse. I would say, we practice the more-than-human world in matrimony, not that the more-than-human world practices matrimony. We practice them, [01:20:00] matrimonially.

Next. Okay. Or no? I just gonna say that, that's pretty good.

Well, where do we get our best stuff from? Let's just wonder that. Do we get our best stuff from being our best? Well, where does that come from? And this is a bit of a barbershop mirrors situation here, isn't it? To, to back, back, back, back.

If you're thinking of time, you can kind of get lost in that generation before, or before, before, before. And it starts to sound like one of them biblical genealogies. But if you think of it as sort of the flash point of multiple presences, if you think of it that way, then you come to [01:21:00] credit the real possibility that your best stuff comes from you being remembered by those who came before you.

Audience: Hmm.

Stephen: Now just let that sit for a second, because what I just said is logically-incompatible.

Okay? You're being remembered by people who came before you. That's not supposed to work. It doesn't work that way. Right?

"Anticipated," maybe, but "remembered?" How? Well, if you credit the possibility of multiple beginnings, that's how. Okay. I'm saying that your best stuff, your best thoughts, not the most noble necessarily. I would mean the most timely, [01:22:00] the ones that seem most needed, suddenly.

You could take credit and sure. Why, why not? Because ostensibly, it arrives here through you, but if you're frank with yourself, you know that you didn't do that on command, right? I mean, you could say, I just thought of it, but you know in your heart that it was thought of and came to you.

I don't think there's any difference between saying that and saying you were thought of.

Audience: Mm-hmm.

Stephen: So, that's what I think the rudiments of old-order matrimony are. They are old people and their benefactors in the food chain and spiritually speaking. Old people and their benefactors, the best part of them [01:23:00] willed to us, entrusted and willed to us. So, when you are willing to enter into the notion that old-order matrimony is older than you, older than your feelings for the other person, older than your love, and your commitment, and your willingness to make the vows and all that stuff, then you're crediting the possibility that your love is not the beginning of anything.

You see. Your love is the advent of something, and I use that word deliberately in its Christian notion, right? It's the oncomingness, the eruption into the present day of something, which turns out to be hugely needed and deeply unsuspected at the same time.

I used to ask in the school, "can you [01:24:00] have a memory of something you have no lived experience of?" I think that's what the best part of you is. I'm not saying the rest of you is shite. I'm not saying that. You could say that, but I am saying that when I say "the best part of you," that needs a lot of translating, doesn't it?

But the gist of it is that the best part of you is entrusted to you. It's not your creation, it's your burden, your obligation, your best chance to get it right. And that's who we are to those who came before us. We are their chance to get it right, and matrimony is one of the places where you practice the gentle art of getting it right.

[01:25:00] Another decent reason to write a book.

Chris: So, gorgeous. Wow. Thank you Stephen. I might have one more question.

Stephen: Okay. I might have one more answer. Let's see.

Chris: Alright. Would I be able to ask if dear Nathalie Roy could join us up here alongside your good man.

So, returning to Matrimony: Ritual, Culture and the Heart's Work. On page 94, [01:26:00] Stephen, you write that

"hospitality of the radical kind is culture in its finest moments. Matrimony is radical hospitality's godmother, and hospitality is matrimony's alchemy at work.

I'm gonna read that again.

Stephen: Yeah.

Chris: Because when I'm reading it on the page, I have to read it 20 times.

Stephen: Oh yeah.

Nathalie: I'd appreciate that.

Stephen: Do you want me to read it?

Chris: If you like?

Stephen: Sure. Just because I know what it sounds like. I got the book here. What's the page number?

Chris: Page 94.

Stephen: Really . Let's back up a little bit.

Okay.

But rather than cast one more stone against the mediations of formal ritual, we could do something else instead. We could consider its strange, [01:27:00] starched, precise ways. We could give ritual a seat at the laid back, "whatever dude table" of our mutual lives, those of them left. This will be hard for people who are living in those trim and sleek condos outfitted with a sink, a microwave, an island counter for snacking, and a pile of takeout delivery boxes in the closet waiting for garbage day.

Those things are the apotheosis of the non-aligned self-designating life. They have a hole where the hearth used to be. Still, I think we should try. Matrimony, I'll try to show you, is radical hospitality's godmother, and hospitality is matrimony's alchemy at work. [01:28:00]

Chris: Mm. Thank you. Thank you, Stephen. Yeah, there's another little one from page 93.

Stephen: Oh. Mm-hmm. Okay then. How does that go?

Chris: Quote, "the ceremonies of hospitality were passports to something like peace, to honest regard for what people did not understand or had never seen or heard as it loomed at the gate in dusty array, in human form. Hospitality was how Gods-loving people loved their Gods and honored their ancestors' ways. They fed the gods of strangers by feeding strangers.

Stephen: There you go. It's all in that one sentence.

Chris: And so I feel like this is an exquisite description, subtle as it may be, of the hospitality that has been offered here on your farm over the years.

There were many times in this very hall where toward the end of our hours-long sessions together at the Orphan Wisdom School, [01:29:00] you Stephen, would implore us to consider that the work of those sessions, which you leaned into with such loving ferocity and faithfulness didn't end once we went for lunch or dinner, that instead the big learning was to be found in the banquet hall, the feasting space most often stewarded by her wife Natalie, and her scullery royalty. And so I'm wondering if you two would be willing to speak to the alchemy of how patrimony, matrimony, and hospitality have met and been practiced here on your farm over the years.

Audience: Mm-hmm.

Stephen: That's why you're sitting here - to answer that one. Away you go.

Nathalie: Most beautiful to hear the whipperwill.

Stephen: "You can do it." "You can do it." It says, "you can do it." "You can do [01:30:00] it."

Nathalie: Well, I think I would begin with how things were when we were married here on this farm down by the river, that what comes to mind is that everybody was participating in making the meals for the guests that were arriving were yet to arrive, and over the course of several days, and that we had an opportunity to lean in on some of the people that came to support or witness. Our dearest friends and companions, they came to cook and participate in the preparation of the meals. And I can remember at a certain given moment in the evening when we all [01:31:00] sat together. Stephen had called over a certain group of the people that had assembled on one side of our gathering place, and I had gathered the other group of people that were not yet gathered in by that first group, and we spoke about hospitality or we spoke about how we would honour their coming, but we spoke about it loudly so that the other side could hear, so that they could be catch a whiff of what their presence meant to us, without directly telling them face to face what they meant to us. They got to overhear this particular kind of murmuring. And that was, I think, the first iteration of not doing the same [01:32:00] thing.

Stephen had different conversations with the people he was sitting with in his cluster, and I was having different kind of conversations with the people who were sitting in my cluster. And together we weren't all talking about the same thing. This was layered somehow and complimentary and our conversations became more twilled than anything else, so that our voices began to stir and to waft and to be combined.

By the next day, there were then already connections made between people who had been in the clusters together, but also I overheard, I happen to have overheard a couple of words that came from your waft, from your cluster of people.

And I think that that has often been the way: Stephen has been here in the hall and I have been down cooking and I do what I can to [01:33:00] receive how it is that people come across the field, having perhaps heard or been in something that I have not even been privy to, because I have been in the kitchen behind certain pots, stirring the dishes or in the garden harvesting.

And I get to actually see what Stephen has been up to, only through how people are as they enter the banquet hall.

Stephen: The devastation writ-large on their faces.

Nathalie: Stephen gets to see how it has been with people in my fold as they come back from having sat in the banquet hall. And so, we're not really doing the same thing and we're not actually in the same room with the same function, but I get to see his work through the visitation of the people that come through.

Do you see [01:34:00] what I'm saying? That there's this communication that seems to be between Stephen and I that is not direct. It's not Stephen telling me something and me telling him something.

Stephen: It's mediated.

Nathalie: It's much larger than that. And it's not a courier that is running between the two of us saying, "Stephen just said," and "Natalie just said." It's not like that at all. I get to tend to a certain element of the poverty of our times to quote that phrase that Stephen has so often used and, and he gets to nourish people in a way that I haven't tended to. Or perhaps, even one leads to the other, and one opens the way to another. So, maybe some kind of sphincter or some kind something gland opens up by listening. There's a many different kinds of sphincters. There's not only one.

Stephen: Are you sure?

Nathalie: Yeah. I think there are, [01:35:00] I think there are three sphincters in the human body.

Stephen: Is is it a matter of opinion or?

Nathalie: I'm not sure a hundred percent, but there's something that opens up something that's loosened, or makes way for people to be able to receive the kind of hospitality that I have to offer together with the people that assemble with me and vice versa. Having been well nourished this way, they might be able to enter these doors and sit here with that kind of nourishment in their bodies.

That's what I can come up to on the fly.

Chris: Mm. Thank you so much.

Nathalie: Never having been interviewed in my life, before.

Chris: And I'm so grateful to have been on the receiving end of that hospitality so many times, leading from one house to another, here on the farm.

Nathalie: And an honour. You give me purpose. And you?

Stephen: Oh, I don't know. I'm still on [01:36:00] sphincters, but I'll see if I can get over that, because it's such a visual.

Nathalie: Maybe it's an ESL moment..

Stephen: Yeah, I think so. So you know, I was the one who coined the term scullery royalty.

Nathalie: You were. Yeah.

Stephen: And people thought I was being a bit disingenuous, I think in the early days when I said, you know, what's happening in the kitchen is what I'm trying to keep pace with.

Yeah. But it wasn't disingenuous at all. I mean, I don't underfunction very frequently and I had no oblig, no need to underfunction around that question either. I'm not saying secretly, "what's happening in the kitchen's the whole thing." I wasn't saying that. I was saying, "if you want monophony, you just choose me, or you just choose Nathalie. And a lot [01:37:00] of people have done this. They say they write letters to Nathalie saying, "You're the real teacher" and that sort of thing over the years, you know. Or, "I want you to be my teacher" or that kind of gear. But if you want polyphony, you allow that, from one place in this field to another place in that one, is civilization's flower. I'm choosing that word very deliberately, and saying that things come to be as a result of the time and the distance and the labour to get from one to the other.

It's not really the places. It's the willingness to move. Just when you've grown accustomed to the devastation or the nurturance of one place, you know, the obligation is to pick up and fold your tent and move, you know? Yeah. And [01:38:00] so, there's that. And you know, we're coming close to the end here, so I'll just read a couple little things to you.

One is not my words and one is.

"In John Berger's novel, Once in Europa, there is a peasant woman sitting in her stone kitchen on her farm in the French Pyrenees, late in the 20th century. Given the obligations to innovation for its own sake, that progress binds us to, she is probably among the last generations of her kind, and she's giving life advice to her young daughter, advice that she knows isn't likely to survive the girl's formal education in town.

It's matrimonial wisdom, tradition-bound, and life-affirmed, [01:39:00] trained upon patrimony. Let me say that again. It is matrimonial wisdom, tradition-bound and life-affirmed, trained upon patrimony. She says, 'I will tell you which men deserve our respect: men who give themselves to hard labour so that those close to them can eat, men who are generous with everything they own, and men who spend their lives looking for God. The rest are pig shit.'

Generosity. Labour. A life spent enthrall to the divinity of the world. It's a severe standard, a severe test. It is also [01:40:00] a affirming, exceedingly candid and deeply alert to the truth and travails and mandate of patrimony. There are men aching in their souls to do this work and have it recognized for what it is: the providing, the pilgrimage, those are the blessings that patrimony has to bestow. Recognition and a willingness to live in the house patrimony builds is a blessing for matrimony.

Finally, you know the word 'matrimony' has as its axis, not bride, not woman, [01:41:00] not girl, but mother. That's the root word of 'matrimony:' 'mother.'"

So, apropos of that, and apropos of your question,

"mothering, I should say, does not seem to have been exclusively, and perhaps not even essentially the domain of people who gave birth to small humans. It includes that, of course, when it happens, if it happens, and that might seem to be its most common function, but the capacity to mother is fundamentally the capacity to put oneself in the way of calling the stuff of human life together, that strange mix of willingness and fate-feeling that inclines a person to say yes to [01:42:00] something larger than themselves, into which the personal and particular parts of them are likely to evanesce. Mothering, you could say, takes the biography of the mother for nourishment, for sustenance. Not creator, exactly. Not autonomous conjurer. A mother is as much on the receiving end of the power of life called to rise as on the doing end, and even more so, mothering is the repertoire of a particular way of being human, the exercise of which is the occasion for life to live. Not the reason, not the cause, the occasion.

And this is why I extend the understanding of mothering into the architecture of matrimony and call that proper visitation of the [01:43:00] former upon the latter, "homemaking." Home is the amniotic sea of human it seems to me. And living out the clutch of articulations of home in a human allotment of days is a life, and the presence of enough humans doing the homework of being together is culture. And so, culture making is patrimonial work, and it is matrimonial work, not separated, bound."

That's what we did. Hmm?

Chris: Yes you did.

I am so lucky. What a thing. Mm-hmm.

Thank you both for being willing to sit here and answer these [01:44:00] questions and for being willing to spill so much of your cups over the years in this place for so many strangers.

Nathalie: I'm glad we ain't done yet. Mm-hmm.

Chris: And so to close, I'd like to quote one final sentence from Matrimony. On page 215, you write Stephen, very succinctly.

"I am quite frequently asked to succumb to interviews."

And so, while this is undoubtedly true, I would argue that the interviews more often than not succumb to you and your labours, and your give a shit, and willingness to speak on behalf of more hospitable patrimonial and matrimonial world.

And so your newest book, Matrimony: Ritual Culture and the Hearts Work, along with your other books, films and music are available for purchase now at www.orphanwisdom.com. [01:45:00] Likewise, news on upcoming events and projects, including the Scriptorium: Echoes of an Orphan Wisdom can also be found at www.orphanwisdom.com. On behalf of the dear friends and family here and those listening, may your labours continue to fan out in the world and be of deep consequence to those who come upon them.

Thank you for your time and consideration and care this evening.

Stephen: Well, this room, I heard some fine things over the years. Tonight was another one.

Leave a comment

Subscribe now

S6 #8 | El Derecho a No Migrar | Aldo Gonzalez y Gloria Romero Lopez

Thu, 26 Jun 2025 13:56:44 GMT

Estimados oyentes, esta entrevista requirió que Aldo y Gloria se conectaran desde zonas rurales. Por lo tanto, la conexión a internet fue intermitente. Hay algunos momentos del episodio en los que puede resultar difícil comprender lo que se dice. Para mayor claridad, consulten la transcripción abajo. Gracias por su comprensión.

Mis entrevistados en este episodio son Aldo Gonzalez y Gloria Romero López. Aldo es zapoteco de la comunidad de Guelatao de Juárez, Oaxaca, México. Ingeniero de formación, promueve el pleno reconocimiento y la implementación de los derechos de los pueblos indígenas. Trabaja en defensa de la biodiversidad local del maíz, especialmente de una variedad de maíz autofertilizante llamada olotón.

Gloria es una mujer Mixteca que nacio en Lázaro Cardenas, Coicoyan de las Flores, Juxtlahuaca, Oaxaca. Curse sus estudios de ingeniería en Tecnologías de la información y comunicaciones en el Instituto Tecnológico Superior - San Miguel el Grande. Actualmente Realizó registros de Nacimientos en el Municipio de Coicoyan de las Flores. Ella gusta mucho platicar en Mixteco.

Notas del Episodio

Las consecuencias al pueblo
El derecho a no migrar
Cambios atraves del NAFTA y el derecho a no migrar
“Yo tengo maiz, no necessito dinero”
La complejidad de las remesas
Las contradicciones y discriminaciones entre migrantes
La posibilidad del retorno masivo de migrantes
La violencia como causa de migracion

Tarea

El Derecho a No Migrar (Libro) - Amazon

El DERECHO A PERMANECER EN CASA

Transcripcion en espanol (English Below)

Chris: [00:00:00] Bienvenido Aldo y bienvenida Gloria al podcast al fin de turismo. Gracias a ambos por estar dispuestos a hablar conmigo hoy sobre estos temas. Tengo curiosidad por saber si ustedes dos se están bien dispuestos a ofrecer una pequeña introducción o resumen sobre ustedes mismos.

Ah, ado, no te escuchamos.

Aldo: Bueno sobre mis viajes, bueno, no me dedico a viajar. Casi no tengo vacaciones. Pero por las cuestiones del trabajo me he tocado ir a diferentes lugares del mundo. Podríamos decir. Este básicamente por el trabajo que realizo?

Más que ir a conocer los lugares a donde a donde me han invitado, lo que he hecho es ir a platicar con la gente que está en esos lugares sobre los problemas que tenemos aquí en la región.

Los problemas que tenemos en México y [00:01:00] quien lo que me ha posibilitado, poder viajar a distintas partes ha sido el problema de la contaminación del maize transgénicos. Entonces eso ha hecho que, con esa bronca que peso en el año 2001, este yo haya tenido la posibilidad de ir a otros lugares a platicar un poco sobre ese problema en particular y muchos otros que se relacionan con él no o el tema de los transgénicos o el tema de los agroquímicos o el tema de el control de las corporaciones hacia la alimentación, hacia las semillas también.

Entonces, digamos que en general, la mayoría de los viajes que yo he realizado están relacionados con estos acentos o con los derechos de los pueblos indígenas también.

Chris: Gracias, Aldo. Y nos podrías decir donde te encuentres hoy?

Aldo: Eh? Bueno, hoy estoy en Guelatao y es mi comunidad y estoy en las oficinas de la organización de mi organización, que es la unión de organizaciones de la Sierra Juarez

Chris: Muchas gracias, [00:02:00] audo Aldo y gloria.

Gloria: Sí, igual. Yo casi no he salido así del estado, pero sí conozco mucha gente que si emigra por lo regular a los estados unidos, es que es donde la mayoría de acá, pero casi no emigran mucho así hacia otros estados. Pero si la mayoría emigra para estados unidos, ya si tengo muchos vecinos, familia y mucho de acá de Coycoyan, si emigran más para allá que son para los estados unidos.

Chris: Muy bien. Muchas gracias por eh, a tiempo con nosotros hoy. Entonces, aunque es temprano en la conversación, mi pregunta es sobre cómo han visto que el regreso de los migrantes a sus pueblos ha afectado a la comunidad en sus propios lugares o pueblos?

Gloria: Sí en en cuando han cómo ha afectado la comunidad? Que muchos cuando regresan, pues ya tienen otras ideas, otras cultura, otra forma de ver la vida y a veces mucho ya no [00:03:00] quieren este participar así en las asambleas de la comunidad o ya vienen con otras técnicas, digamos, de cultivo y las técnicas que anteriormente habían acá, pues ya se van perdiendo y yo más cada veo como también esto afecta también en sus vidas personales, porque muchos cuando regresan ya regresan ya enfermos, cansados.

En en el mejor de los casos, muchos ya regresan con dinero, no? Y eso hace que la gente que está en el pueblo, ve que como ellos les fue bien, pues también quieren emigrar y ya después ya son más personas que quieren migrar y ya se se hacen más y de idea de que, pues allá en estados unidos existe la oportunidad de que puedan mejorar sus vidas.

Pero yo digo que así en ,general el impacto es un tanto positivo como [00:04:00] también negativo, porque igual, como digo, muchos regresan ya cansados, enfermos. Muchos igual dejan aquí sus familiares y cuanto regresan, pues sus familia ya no los encuentran, o algunos que dejan sus papás, cuando regresan sus papás ya, ya murieron o ha o esas situaciones que impacta así su vida personal.

Chris: Gracias, Gloria. Aldo, querrías responder?

Aldo: Aunque aquí en la comunidad de Guelatao, no hay muchos, no hay una migración tan alta como en otras comunidades cercanas. Digamos que una de las cosas que nosotros vemos que ha afectado, es que se elevan los precios, porque traen dinero, ya no trabajan en el campo. Entonces, para sus familias reciben recursos.

Y pues eso hace que ellos tengan mayor capacidad para poder pagar a los mozos, por ejemplo, para que vayan a ser la [00:05:00] misma. Entonces, eso hace que el resto de la población pues se sienta afectada, porque no tiene los recursos para poder pagar lo que está pagando un migrante. Bueno, eso en alguna medida, está afectando la producción también de maíz, de por sí, ya la había afectado, porque muchos salen y dejan de trabajar la tierra. Los que quieren que se siga trabajando la tierra por parte de su familia mandan recursos, pero digamos que allí los costos se elevan para el resto de la población porque ellos pagan salarios más altos. Entonces, si alguien viene a la comunidad a trabajar, te va a cobrar más de lo que te cobraba anteriormente y muchos no lo pueden pagar.

Entonces nos dice, "ya no voy a sembrar, porque el mozo está muy caro." No?

Y eso es una afectación, pues directa, digamos a la economía de quien no migra.

Y como hay pocos migrantes también, o digo [00:06:00] como hay poca gente que se que que se queda trabajar el campo en la comunidad, ya no hay suficientes personas para que se pueda hacer lo que nosotros llamamos gozona.

O sea que vayamos entre todos a trabajar la parcela de cada uno de los que entran a ese tipo de trabajo. Bueno, también, eso es una afectación por la migración. No?

Chris: Y Gloria, tú piensas que esa misma dinámica existe o ha pasaron en tu pueblo?

Gloria: No, yo digo que igual, sí, estoy de acuerdo con lo que dicen algo y si sí, ha influenciado mucho de las personas que emigran si pagan más que los que no migran. Sí, si se ve mucho ese cambio.

Chris: Gracias. Este pues parte de mi mi interés o cómo empecé, eh, acercándome a la cuestión de inmigración fue en parte por mi familia. [00:07:00] También eran migrantes de Macedonia y Grecia, y el otro lado de Inglaterra hacia Canadá hace como 50 años. Entonces este lo que he sentido, es que las dinámicas, las consecuencias de la migración en los pueblos y la gente que no migren, que hay patrones en el nivel mundial, y son casi bueno, muy parecidos. .

Encontré un un libro en inglés, pero también existía en español. Eh? Que se llama El Derecho A No M igrar o The Right To Stay Home por David Bacon. Y ese libro, es titulado por una declaración que la gente de FIOB o La Frente Indígena de Organizaciones Binacionales hicieron en ahí en Santiago Juxtlahuaca en La Mixteca,

Después de días de días de discutir sobre las [00:08:00] consecuencias de migraciones en los lugares de los migrantes, o sea, los pueblos originarios de los migrantes, resultó una declaración: "el derecho a no migrar conjunto con el derecho a migrar." Entonces tengo curiosidad por saber si ustedes podrían hablar sobre esos tiempos y la declaración, si saben cómo se formó o cómo se fue recibida en la mixteca o en la sierra norte de Oaxaca.

Aldo: Bueno, nosotros aquí en la organización. Sí, hemos hablado del derecho a no migrar, porque estamos interesados en fortalecer la identidad de las personas que vivimos en nuestras comunidades. Pues, al final, somos parte de un pueblo más grande. No solamente es nuestra comunidad, sino que hay varias otras comunidades que pertenecemos al mismo pueblo, al pueblo zapoteca y en ese sentido, pues lo que estamos tratando [00:09:00] de hacer es que se fortalezcan nuestras comunidades, que se fortalezcan nuestra comunalidad, que es nuestra forma de organización comunitaria, y por esa razón es que preferiríamos que la gente no migra.

Pero el problema es que ha habido un empobrecimiento muy brutal del campo en general, no solamente en México. Lo vemos también en otros países, que los que emigran principalmente son gente que sale del campo y van hacia los estados unidos a trabajar al campo en estados unidos, pero en condiciones que son completamente distintas a como se trabajaba en la comunidad. Incluso aquí en México, algunos van a trabajar en los campos del norte del país, también este en condiciones, pues terribles, con muchos agroquímicos.

La gente regresa en algunos casos regresan enfermos, no? O regresan con las patas por delante, dijeron en el pueblo, porque [00:10:00] ya pues están muertos. Regresan nada más para que los entierren en la comunidad. Pero pues, prácticamente toda su vida la hicieron fuera, no?

Entonces, quienes se van sufre porque añoran estar en la comunidad. Quieren comer lo que en la comunidad. Quieren escuchar la música de la comunidad. Quieren hacer la vida como si estuvieran en la comunidad, pero ya no está. Quienes se quedan a vivir fuera de la comunidad, digamos en estados unidos, sobre todo, pues sus hijos ya no los van a entender, porque ellos son educados de una manera distinta en escuelas que no tienen nada que ver con su cultura.

Digamos que son colonizados mentalmente en las escuelas en estados unidos. Hay muy pocas escuelas que podríamos decir tienen la la eh capacidad de poder ser interculturales y enseñar en español y inglés y [00:11:00] enseñar la cultura de la comunidad y la cultura pues que se viven en los estados unidos, el individualismo.

Entonces es muy complejo que un niño de inmigrantes, nacido en estados unidos pueda regresar a la comunidad, porque pues ya se adaptó a otra forma, a otra civilización, a otra forma de vida completamente distinta a la comunitaria. Y bueno, eso a nosotros nos preocupa. Estamos interesados en que la gente se quede.

Sabemos que es difícil porque hay pocos recursos económicos en las comunidades, pero aun así pues, estamos haciendo el esfuerzo para que la gente se sienta orgullosa de ser de sus orígenes y no tengan la necesidad de migrar o en último de los casos, si tiene la necesidad de emigrar, por lo menos que tenga una referencia de lo que es su comunidad y la lleve a donde esté, [00:12:00] no?

Porque pues, a veces, pues la gente lo hace por necesidad. Y esa necesidad, te lleva a a otros lugares, pero si tú te sientes orgulloso de tu identidad cultural, vas a llevar ese identidad donde tú estés. En el caso de la sierra, hay gente de varias comunidades que hace comunidad en donde está. Pero bueno, obviamente no lo va a poder hacer de la misma manera como si viviera en la comunidad, pero al menos algo se llevan.

Otra forma de de ver el mundo se puede llevar también, aunque no la vas a poder practicar como como lo vas a hacer en tu comunidad, no? Y en general, digamos el trabajo que nosotros hacemos en la organización está enfocado a que se fortalezcan, pues distintos mecanismos para que la gente se quede.

Por ejemplo, ahorita estamos trabajando en la en el establecimiento de la escuela de agroecología, para que los jóvenes tengan herramientas para [00:13:00] poder sembrar la tierra sin depender de los herbicidas de todos los agroquímicos que vienen con la revolución verde y que son los que utilizan normalmente en los estados unidos para la producción agrícola de la mayoría de las cosas que se hacen allá.

Y dentro de este esquema de agroecología, pues obviamente que para nosotros el elemento cultural es es fundamental porque no podemos hacer solamente la agricultura fuera de nuestro contexto territorial-cultural. Entonces, todo esto tiene que estar englobado en esas, iniciativas que estamos tratando de impulsar eso.

Chris: Mm ya. Gracias. Gracias, Aldo. Y Gloria, esa declaración surgió en la región en la Mixteca donde estás y pues me gustaría, saber si recuerdes la declaración, si era parte de la política o la gente de tu pueblo?

Gloria: Bueno, me enteré que esta declaración surgió debido a las grandes [00:14:00] injusticias que sufre los migrantes. Como dice algo desde el memento en que salen de sus hogares hasta llegar allá en, digamos en estados unidos, donde tienen que trabajar igual y siguen sufriendo lo que son abusos físicos, psicológicos.

Y qué más quisiéramos que la gente? Pues no, no emigrara no, pero sabemos que debido a sus necesidades emigran, pero ojalá y cuanto emigraran tuvieran esas so oportunidades de tan si quiere emigrar lo mejor posible que puedan y no pasar tu portando sufrimiento. Mm-hmm.

La declaración surgió en esta zona de Juxtlahuaca, según lo que yo he encontrado igual, no sabía mucho sobre esta declaración, pero debido a esto ya cheque. Y sí, la declaración surgió especificamente por las injusticias que sufre la gente desde salir de su hogar, hasta llegar en estados unidos.

Todos los abusos que llegan a [00:15:00] sufrir en el camino y hasta igual muchos hasta allá, aunque estén en el trabajo allá, también siguen sufriendo. Y por eso, pues, qué más quisiera la gente que no inmigrara no? Qué más quisiéramos que toda la gente tuviera la dicha de tener una vida digna en su país, en su tierra, para que no tuviera que emigrar, pero sucede, sucede que si emigran, sucede por muchas razones que a veces no están en nuestro alcance poderlos ayudar, pero digamos tan siquiera ofrecerles las oportunidades para que emigren de la mejor manera posible y no tengan tantas desventajas al memento de emigrar.

Chris: Gracias. No, pues sí, el pueblo de mi papá, por ejemplo, era un pueblo campesino en Grecia y ya no esta abandonado, pero cuando si salieran hubiera 800 personas. Y el día de hoy hay como 50. Y hay como unos dos, tres campesinos todavía, entonces [00:16:00] este entiendo bien el de lo que dicen y que tan importante es de crear las condiciones para que la gente no necesitan migrarse si no necesitan.

Pero me gustaría también preguntarles sobre el éxito quizás que ha existido. Entonces, si hubo una declaración en que salió de la verdad no es muy conocido, a pesar del éxito del libro y y esas cosas. No es muy conocido, por lo que he visto en México y por hablar con algunas personas de FIOB en estados unidos, pero vamos a eso en un memento. Quería preguntarles si hay programas o han visto ciertos éxitos dentro o a través de esas programas que, por ejemplo, que mencionaste Aldo y Glorias si en los pueblos hay como un cambio. Si algo ha cambiado en esos 15 años.

Gloria: [00:17:00] Ajá de mi parte. Yo digo que sí. Sí, ha habido un cambio. Tal vez no un cambio directo. No ha habido la declaración. Sí, sí ha ayudado, nada más que nosotros, no lo hemos visto porque casi no se menciona. Pero si ha habido. Gracias a eso, pues se han formado programas, proyectos que se han apoyado a los migrantes, pero que muchas veces nuestros desconocemos.

Pero sí, sí existe, digamos el impacto positivo que ha generado esa declaración.

Aldo: Bueno, en el caso de la sierra Juárez, la sierra norte de Oaxaca, digamos, hay algunas comunidades que tienen un alto índice de migración y bueno, ahí en algunos casos, han llegado algunos programas, por ejemplo, como " dos por uno," donde los migrantes, digamos, ponen una parte de recursos, el estado pone otra parte o pone dos partes, digamos el gobierno federal, el gobierno del estado para hacer alguna obra en la comunidad.

Pero realmente eso no está [00:18:00] solucionando ningún problema, no porque básicamente lo que está haciendo es obligar a los migrantes a que contribuyan a realizar alguna mejor alguna obra en su en su comunidad y cuando esos recursos los podían destinar para sus familias o para otra cosa o para cumplir con sus obligaciones comunitarias, pero no necesariamente realizando las acciones que el gobierno está obligado a rerealizar obras sociales o cosas por el estilo.

Entonces, pues yo podría decir que de los programas que que han aparecido en los últimos años, pues tampoco nos han ayudado mucho a a frenar la migración. Por ejemplo, el programa del sexenio pasado más anunciado fue el de Sembrando Vida, no? Y si bien ese apoyo a algunos campesinos en algunas comunidades, no en todas, pues, podríamos [00:19:00] decir que si los capturó para que no migraran hacia los estados unidos, pero dejaron de sembrar maíz cuando inicialmente el programa este era para que sembraran más maíz.

Nos pusieron a sembrada arbolitos, no árboles que muchos casos ni siquiera son de la región que no iban a pegar o si iban a pegar, no iban a ser útiles aquí, porque venían de otras regiones o si crecían, ya no iba se ya no iba a poder cultivarse maíz en esos lugares porque les iban a hacer sombra al maíz.

Nosotros vivimos en laderas. Aquí no hay lugares planos como en estados unidos, no? Entonces, digamos que programas gubernamentales que hayan beneficiado en alguna medida. El flujo migratorio que hayan hecho que haya menos migratorio, pues tampoco se ven. No se ven con mucha claridad. Nosotros vemos que se siguen estableciendo políticas para destruir el tejido comunitario, para expulsar a la población [00:20:00] del campo hacia las ciudades o hacia los estados unidos.

Chris: Gracias, Aldo. Y has mencionado? Que tu trabajo tiene mucho que ver con la regeneración de maíz y obviamente maíz criollo o sea local también. Porque es tan importante para el pueblo frente de las consecuencias de la migración?

Aldo: El Maiz para nosotros es un elemento muy importante. Nosotros podríamos decir que es el corazón de la comunidad porque lo vamos a comer todos los días. Nosotros decimos "nativo". Les dicen c"criollo" desde las instituciones de muchos lugares por costumbre, pero la palabra está mal empleada. Nosotros decimos que son nuestros maíces nativos.

Y no es lo mismo comer una tortilla de maíz nativo, un elote de nuestros maices, a que comprar un elote que ahora venden en la ciudad que fue hecho con [00:21:00] maíces híbridos o que tengamos que comer tortillas hechas con maíces transgen. Desgraciadamente, en los últimos años, yo creo que no solamente pasa en la sierra, sino en muchos otros lugares del país, se ha incrementado el uso de las tortillerías y entonces ya no sabemos con qué maíz están produciendo esas tortillas, pero no se pueden comparar con las tortillas de nuestros maíces hechas con nuestras propias tecnologías. No?

Entonces, yo creo que el maíz para nosotros, además de ser nuestro alimento principal o el que más consumimos, también nos da identidad. El maíz nos convoca, por ejemplo, a trabajar juntos, cosa que en estados unidos, no lo hacen. Todos ellos contratan migrantes para que hagan su trabajo, no? Y ellos van a producir lo que vayan a producir para vender aquí.

El maíz que se siembra [00:22:00] normalmente es para consumir. Casi no se vende el maíz. Y por ejemplo, ahora que están poniendo precios de garantía, no? Precio garantía las de MXN $6. En nuestras comunidades, el maíz, no lo puedes vender a MXN $6, o sea, por lo menos, lo vendes a MXN $20, si es que lo vendes, porque es el esfuerzo de tu trabajo y también por la misma gente que la comunidad o incluso por los migrantes o por las familias inmigrantes, es valorado como una, un un alimento que es completamente distinto a el maíz que se compra en la tienda, en la CONASUPO o en Diconsa o en cualquier tienda comercial o qué viene de la tortilla? Entonces hay un aprecio especial por nuestros maíces. Eso es importante, pero cada vez se está produciéndo menos. Ahora anteriormente quien tenía maíz era considerado rico. [00:23:00] Desde una perspectiva comparado de hoy, quien tiene maíz es considerado tonto o pobre porque no tiene dinero. Sin embargo, pues sobre todo los campesinos viejos que dicen bueno, pues "si yo tengo maíz, no necesito dinero" para vivir porque tengo el alimento suficiente.

Incluso anteriormente, por ejemplo, cuando la gente tenía que realizar sus cargos comunitarios que no eran pagados ahora en muchas comunidades, han empezado a pagar el cargo. Quien podía ocupar el cargo era un agente mayor, que sus hijos ya habían crecido, pero que además, él tenía maíz para no pedirle favor a nadie de cómo iba a solventar la alimentación de su familia por el año o el tiempo que tuviera que estar al frente del cargo comunitario.

Entonces, digamos que el maíz también hace comunidad? Y con estas políticas, falta de apoyos o de [00:24:00] eliminación de apoyo, el campo mexicano están lastimando también nuestras formas de organización communitaria. Eso.

Chris: Qué fuerte. Sí, me acordé en lo que dijiste Aldo, unas palabras que que escribió el filósofo Ivan Illich y no sé si es exactamente lo que escribió, pero básicamente dijo que durante casi toda la historia de la humanidad, la mayor medida de la pobreza era si uno tenía o no que comprar su alimento, su comida. Es decir, si tenías comprar tu comida en el pasado, era un señal, una medida de de pobreza, de decir que buenas eres pobre si tienes que comprar. Gloria, tienes algo para agregar a ese punto.

Gloria: Ese punto no, no,

Chris: [00:25:00] está bien, está bien. Pues me gustaría también seguir con ese lo que mencionaste Aldo, de los recursos y lo que se llaman remisas y por lo que he visto las estadísticas, no dicen que es más o menos seis porciento de la economía mexicana está compuesta por remesas enviadas por familiares o amigos en estados unidos.

En algunos de los pueblos a los que me han invitado, me han dicho que el pueblo no sobreviviría sin remesas. En otros. Me han dicho que el pueblo sobreviviría mucho mejor si la gente no se fuera. Este es un tema muy complejo y mi pregunto. Si ustedes dos podrían hablar sobre esa complejidad que han visto en sus pueblos y en otros lugares como resultado de las remesas.

Y pues siento que se sale [00:26:00] como ese tema a una pregunta vital o central que es como si una persona puede o no ser responsable de un lugar estando al otro lugar?

Gloria: Yo digo que sí. Las remesas si han influido positivamente porque gracias a ellos ha habido muchos negocios, comercio y siento que si le quitáramos esas remesas, esos negocios se caería, porque el dinero que mucha gente que va a gastar en esos negocios es dinero que sus familiares envían de estados unidos. Gracias a ello, pues compran sus alimentos, los materiales que ocupan desde útiles escolares hasta cosas personales que ocupe. Y si en las remesas, yo siento que sí, estaría complicado porque como hasta ahorita, no hay suficientes oportunidades dentro del país para que pueda satisfacer esa demanda, yo siento que si las [00:27:00] quitáramos, sí, sería un impacto muy fuerte negativamente.

Aldo: Decía yo que el lunes es el día de mercado en Ixtlan. Es la comunidad más grande de esta región. Y este cuando va uno llegando a isl, lo primero que ve uno es la fila en el banco. Es una fila mayor que cualquier otro día. La mayoría de la gente que está formada ahí va a recibir remesas y luego la va a gastar en en el mercado. En el mejor de los casos, pues sería bueno que comprara cosas de la región, pero muchas de las cosas que compran también son procesadas. Vienen de fuera, no? Incluso una cosa que da hasta miedo a veces es ver cómo la la señora se llevan sus paquetes de maruchan, no?

Entonces dice eso es lo [00:28:00] que van a comer los niños. Y sí están cambiándole la alimentación a los niños porque es más fácil poner hervir la sopa que ya viene en esa caja, le echa en agua, se hierve y hasta la comida.

Entonces, si se reciben recursos que sostienen a la familia, pero nos están cambiando la forma de vida, porque pues no puedes sobrevivir como estaban haciendo anteriormente nuestros antepasados, nuestros papás, nuestros abuelos, pero nos están cambiando la vida y nos están haciendo dependientes del dinero. Nos están haciendo individualistas también porque ahora tener dinero, pues puede ser una cosa de prestigio, no?

Pero realmente las remesas no están resolviendo un problema de fondo en la comunidad. Están resolviendo un problema de una sobrevivencia impuesta, no? [00:29:00] Porque te quitan tu forma de ser, te quitan tu forma de vivir comunitaria y te imponen una forma de vida individual que se basa en el dinero y no en las relaciones familiares o las relaciones comunitarias que existían anteriormente.

Entonces, digamos que las remesas te van a ayudar a vivir. Te van a ayudar a comprar cosas, no? Muchas de esas cosas no van a ser locales. O sea, llega el dinero a la comunidad y se va de la comunidad para el que compró cosas fuera de la comunidad y que vino a vender a este lugar, no?

Pero, entonces está ayudando podríamos decir que la economía capitalista no está ayudando a la economía comunitaria. Aun cuando sean gentes de la comunidad las que vendan las cosas, no? Digamos que puede ser que una parte se quede en la comunidad porque el comerciante de la comunidad fue a la ciudad, compró las cosas y las trajo aquí.

El se va a quedar con su ganancia, pero finalmente le está haciendo el trabajo al [00:30:00] capitalista que produjo esas cosas y las llevó a la comunidad a través de ese comerciante. Entonces las remesas se están ayudando a fortalecer el sistema capitalista y a destruir el sistema comunitario.

Chris: Anoche, un amigo me ha contado que hay algunos pueblos aquí en Oaxaca que apenas se juntaron en sus asambleas para platicar sobre la posibilidad que la amenaza del memento de Trump en estados unidos para deportar todos los migrantes.

Bueno, no todos los migrantes, pero los migrantes que no conformen con el mundo de Trump ahi en estados unidos. Y qué pasaría? O sea, la gente en las asambleas están hablando de qué pasaría si eso pasaría? Si, de repente hay cientos, si no miles, de compañeros y [00:31:00] familiares que de repente lleguen de nuevo al pueblo y obviamente sin ese esos fondos? Quizás es un poco de lo que pasó en la pandemia. También hubo muchas historias de gente de del norte allá, volviendo a sus pueblos. Y se empezaron a trabajar en las milpas, pero luego se fueron de nuevo a al norte pues a trabajar.

Gloria: Sí, bueno, si eso digamos si esa amenaza se llegara a cumplir y todos los migrantes regresaran, yo siento que sería muy complicado para el país sostener a todos esos migrantes, porque hasta ahorita no hay tantas oportunidades. Digamos si hay un programa del más conocido sembrando vida, pero está cumpliendo muy poquito el trabajo que debe de cumplir.

Y si te regresaran todos los migrantes nos quedaríamos como que atascados como sería un impacto, yo siento que, negativo, porque no tenemos la posibilidad de de [00:32:00] recibirlos. No tenemos las oportunidades, no tenemos programas, no tenemos, hay muchas cosas que no nos van a favorecer, porque ellos, si ellos regresan, van a ver muchos migrantes, pero sin un sustento, sin algo que los pueda sostener para que tengan una vida más o menos como la que ya tenían cuando estaban allá.

Y porque no solo va a afectar a ellos, sino también sus familias que tienen acá al ver que sus familiares que estaban allá ya van a estar acá.

Chris: Gracias. Gloria. Sí, Aldo.

Aldo: Bueno, algunos empiezan a preguntar a mí. Nosotros vemos que, incluso en estados unidos, hay algunos migrantes que votaron por Trump. Muchos que votaron por Trump. Platicando con algunas personas digamos que los que pagan impuestos y ya tienen su residencia en estados unidos, ven a los migrantes documentados como estorbo, como una competencia [00:33:00] desleal, porque ellos no están obligados a pagar impuestos. Y entonces no.

Porque es parte del modelo, el model modelo capitalista diseñado. Digamos que entre los mismos mexicanos inmigrantes, hay contradicciones, hay discriminación. Digamos un migrante que ya es residente, a veces no va a apoyar a un migrante illegal porque puede quitar el empleo.

Y bueno, esto nos meten en situaciones complejas al final de cuentas, porque, incluso estos migrantes votaron por Donald Trump. Estarían de acuerdo en que deportaran a los migrantes similares.

Es un extremo. Ahora, los migrantes en general, si son deportados, los migrantes indocumentados y son deportados, van afectar la economía también de los estados unidos? No? Porque hay muchas cosas que en estados unidos dejarían de funcionar, si no hay inmigrantes. [00:34:00] O sea, quién va a cuidar a los viejitos, por ejemplo?

Muchos migrantes, sobre todo mujeres se dedican al cuidado de personas enfermas o personas mayores de edad que no tienen familia o que si tienen familia de todas formas, los mantienen prácticamente en el abandono o viven de su pensión y ya no pueden hacer su vida normal porque tienen algún padecimiento, etcétera.

Y necesitan una gente que las corre Normalmente son mexicanos o son migrantes indocumentados los que hacen ese tipo de trabajo. Este sector de la población de estados unidos se debería afectar. Los granjeros que siembran, digamos, para vender los productos en el mercado de estados unidos, la mayoría contratan migrantes no documentados.

Entonces ellos también van a tener un problema de que su producción agrícola va a bajar porque no va a ver migrantes. Y hay otros sectores de la economía en estados unidos que también resultarían afectados. No sé [00:35:00] si Trump no lo está viendo o se hace el que no lo ve o es solamente un amague, como quien dice.

Y esta es como una amenaza que no va a cumplir porque finalmente eso afectaría la economía de los estados unidos. Si llegara a hacerse, aunque fuera de manera parcial, que es lo más probable, pues los migrantes que fueran deportados hacia México, no sabemos si traigan remesas o no. No sabemos si hayan tenido ahorros o no.

Puede ser que algunos sí, puede ser que algunos no. Muchos de los que regresan ya no están acostumbrados a vivir en comunidad o en su comunidad. No están acostumbrados a vivir a realizar las actividades en el campo y preferirían vivir en la ciudad, pero en la ciudad no va a haber empleo. No va a haber suficientes empleos para que ellos puedan hacer una vida menos [00:36:00] rural, digamos en su regreso a México.

Algunos otros dicen bueno, pues si a mí me deporten, pues yo me regreso a sembrar maiz y no pasa nada, pero no creo que sea la mayoría o no creo que sea la totalidad, al menos no los que vayan a regresar a su comunidad.

Quienes han trabajado desde niños en la comunidad y saben realizarlas el trabajo de campo, no van a tener problema, pero quienes ya se acostumbraron a realizar actividades que no son agrícolas y han sido obligados a migrar, pues iban a tener ese problema de que no van a saber que hacer cuando retornen a este país o cuando los obliguen a retornar a este país.

Chris: Si yo recuerdo leyendo un libro hace unos años, y era un poco raro porque el libro era publicado en 1940. Y fue una historia social de la migración llegando en estados unidos en el [00:37:00] siglo anterior y básicamente dijo que si llegaron como los alemanes o una ola de migrantes alemanes. Los que ya estuvieran allá odiaban los alemanes porque los alemanes estaban listos a pagar más renta y aceptar menos ingresos de trabajo. Y luego otro 10 años, pasa no? Y quizás ya hay más alemanes ahora, pero ya vienen los ucráneos y los alemanes están enojados porque los u cráneos están listos para pagar más renta y trabajar por menos. Y luego los los alemanes se van a la periferia o se encuentran nuevos pueblos o ciudades. Se migran, básicamente.

Y es un ciclo que hasta la fecha vemos en lo que dijiste Aldo respeto de la gente que ya tiene residencia en estados unidos, por ejemplo, los mexicanos diciendo que, "pues ya no, ya tengo el mío, [00:38:00] entonces nadie más," no? Ese tiene una historia muy, muy largo.

Y además, la cosa que yo crecía en en Toronto en Canadá. Canadá está conocido y también se promueven el país como un país de multiculturalismo. O sea, la gran mayoría de nuestros papás son de otros países. O sea, es un país de migrantes. Pero, crecimos con este idea nacional que la población del país siempre estuvo disminuyendo, o sea menos y menos gente cada generación. Entonces, por eso teníamos que invitar y aceptar un montón de inmigrantes cada año, o sea, un montón de montón.

Pero leyendo las historias sociales, me di cuenta que, pues esas invitaciones y sentido de estar abierto al otro, no era parte de la compasión del país canadiense.

Era porque [00:39:00] necesitaban cada vez más, entrecomillas "labor barato", o sea, gente que estaban dispuestos a trabajar los trabajos que nadie más querían hacer y por dinero que nadie más querían trabajar. Y entonces el estado tenían que seguir invitando, trayendo gente de afuera para hacer ese trabajo.

Y la pregunta sería, entonces quizás, qué haríamos? Como dijo gloria, para asegurar que hay un trabajo digno, hay una vida digna para la gente. Y lo digo porque cuando hablé con un representante de FIOB que era representante de FIOB en 2009 durante la declaración a no migrar. Y le pregunté entonces, por qué esa declaración no ha salido viral o popular en estados unidos y otros países? Y me dijo "ah, bueno, no, es que en estados unidos, la cosa es que si eres de la parte izquierda de la [00:40:00] política, no podrías criticar nada de la migración." O sea, toda la migración es bonito, no? No hay un espejo a las realidades y pero si te criticas la migración en cualquiera manera, eres automáticamente parte de la derecha o ultra derecha. Eres un hijo de Trump, etcétera.

Aldo: De hecho, por ejemplo, Trump, no podríamos decir que sea un nativo americano, verdad? Los nativos americanos no tienen el pelo anaranjado. Entonces el vino de otro país, vino de Europa. Y bueno a la mejor ahora ya se siente estadounidense y no quiere que otros vayan a ese país de manera ilegal, como a lo mejor sus papás llegaron a los estados unidos a pagar rentas caras y a recibir salarios bajos.

Pero pues él ya se hizo al modo capitalista de estados unidos. Tiene la [00:41:00] nacionalidad de los estados unidos y ahora no quiere que otros migren. Pero tampoco creo que quiera reconocer derechos de los nativos americanos que son quienes han vivido ahí por muchas más generaciones que las de la familia de tronco de muchos otros que se sienten estadounidenses ahora.

Estaba viendo hace unos días un video de como viven, algunas familias en Mongolia. Mongolia es un país en donde todavía hay pastores nómadas que no viven en una ciudad o en una comunidad agraria. Viven en un territorio amplio y van siguiendo a su ganado. Que va cambiando de lugar, defendiendo de la estación del año.

Ellos no tienen necesidad de emigrar. O sea, ellos han hecho su vida así desde hace mucho tiempo por muchas generaciones. E incluso no tienen la necesidad de tener los recursos económicos para [00:42:00] comprar cosas porque no necesitan tantas cosas. Está en una tienda de campaña para poder irse para otro lado que a lo mejor los muebles más básicos para poder vivir adentro de su tienda de campaña y se acabo.

Y eso no quiere decir que sean pobres. El capitalismo mide la pobreza en función de los ingresos económicos. Si ganas menos de al día, pues eres una persona muy pobre. Pero. Pues el dinero no te va a solucionar todos los problemas del mundo. Entonces, creo que tenemos que empezar a mirarnos de otra manera y ver que los recursos económicos no son la única solución para la vida.

Nos han hecho creer eso en los últimos años. Entonces, hoy, quien no tiene dinero es pobre, no? Pero creo que hay otras formas en que hemos vivido la mayor parte de la humanidad en este planeta que no eran como esta forma de vida capitalista que hoy nos están imponiendo, no? Y nos la están imponiendo porque [00:43:00] pues cada vez son menos gente las que quieren controlar la economía mundial.

O sea, nosotros lo vemos. Cada vez son menos compañías tras nacionales las que tienen, por ejemplo, el negocio de las semillas y las semilleros que había en México hasta hace 30 años, ya desaparecieron en estos últimos años. Y ahora los tienen cuatro grandes empresas a nivel mundial. Pues obviamente que ellos quieren tener el negocio de las semillas y si no quieren que nadie más tenga negocio de las semillas o que los campesinos no tengan sus propias semillas para poder sobrevivir, entonces están expropiando la posibilidad de generar una vida de una manera distinta, no? Entonces ellos nos van a obligar o nos quieren obligar a que hagamos la vida como dependiendo de lo que ellos nos puedan vender, y desaparecer esas otras formas de sobrevivir en el planeta.

Yo creo que esas otras formas, aunque muy deterioradas, [00:44:00] muy golpeadas, siguen vigentes en muchos lugares y habrá gente que las quiera reivindicar, nosotros las queremos reivindicar y creemos que hay otra forma de hacer la vida en esta planeta. Hay muchas otras formas de hacer la vida en tu planeta que son.

Chris: Gracias, Aldo. Este Gloria, te gustaría agregar algo?

Gloria: Sí, bueno, igual por parte de lo como lo que afecta también a que la declaración no sea tan famosa, es porque, como dice Aldo, es que estamos tan enfocados en el capitalismo que si por un memento, no nos enfocáramos en ese ámbito del capitalismo, yo siento que, pues todos dirían que tienen una vida digna en sus tierras y se quedarían más, pero como todos estamos enfocados en lo material, en el dinero y todo eso, pues decimos que para qué vamos a dar tanto mención a la declaración, si no es útil, [00:45:00] supuestamente?

Pero es porque hemos tenido tanto esa idea del capitalismo de que siempre queremos ver dinero, todo lo que implica el capitalismo, y nos olvidamos un poco de lo que realmente significa tener la vida digna, porque pues somos esos ricos en muchas cosas, no? Tenemos agua, tenemos tierra. Y podríamos ser felices con eso. Pero igual no nos conformamos con eso. Siempre queremos más porque esas son las ideas que el capitalismo nos ha metido. Mm-hmm.

Chris: Gracias, gloria. Igual, para mí, como aunque he pasado mucho tiempo, visitando y trabajando unos pueblos de Oaxaca, creciendo en un metrópolis urbano, occidental moderno, etcétera, yo tengo que imaginar una vida digna. Yo no crecí en una sociedad donde podían apuntar a un ejemplar de una vida digna.

[00:46:00] En ese libro que escribió de David be David bacon sobre la ola o caravana más reciente de inmigrantes que se dirigen a los estados unidos, esta vez de este Venezuela, se mencionó en 2023 creo, se estima que 200,000 migrantes ingresaron a los estados unidos caras. Teniendo en cuenta esas cifras y las diversas crisis que obligan a las personas a mudarse en nuestros tiempos, qué consejos o comentarios les daría a las personas, ya sean campesinos indígenas o modernos que ven la migración como la única respuesta?

Gloria: Sí. Sí. Bueno, el consejo que yo daría así sería que si tienen las posibilidades, como digo, si tienen.

Aunque no [00:47:00] tengan mucho, no, pero si me nací en una zona donde no hay violencia donde más o menos, si pueden vivir más o menos, si pueden tener una vida digna o a lo que se puede asemejar a una vida digna, pues que se queden ahí. No hay necesidad. Bueno, sí. Sabes que si hay necesidad, pero que no se vean tan forzados a migrar?

Porque pues hay es complicado, es difícil todo lo que van a sufrir toda lo que implica, como digo, también un principio, muchos emigran para mejorar sus vidas, pero igual o mejorar la vida de sus familias. Pero muchos cuando regresan esas familias por las que se fueron, cuando regresan, esa familia ya no la encuentran. Ya está muerta.

Muchos que igual tengo motivos que igual emigraron. Y se fueron para dar mejor vida a sus papás, pero sus papás ya murieron y ellos todavía siguen sin regresar. Y la vida a y se supuestamente le [00:48:00] iban a dar mejor vida, pero nunca sucedió. Simplemente están sobreviviendo, pero nunca, nunca cumplieron ese sueño.

Y yo digo, el consejo que yo les daría es que si tiene la posibilidad de tener una vida digna en sus tierras, pues que se queden ahí y que no vean la migración como el gran sueño, como como todos este lo imaginamos, no?

Aldo: Bueno, yo creo que la migración no es una decisión de las personas que se ven obligadas a migrar. Hay muchos factores. Estados unidos necesita mano de obra barata, como tú decías. Entonces, pues aunque Trump diga que no quiere emigrantes, si quiere migrantes. Y lo que sucede en Venezuela, pues al final de cuentas es parte de las políticas que se hicieron en estados unidos, no? Ahí metieron a ese país en crisis.

Y luego llegó un ticket de los estados unidos [00:49:00] y les dijo a sus paisanos que se inmigraban hacia los estados unidos. Iban a ser bien recibidos. Nunca se imaginaron el calvario que tenían que sufrir en el tránsito para poder llegar a estados unidos. Y cuando llegan a estados unidos, pues tampoco son bien recibidos como les habían ofrecido que sería su bienvenida, no?

Y en México, nosotros vemos ahora en nuestro país, por ejemplo, como se ha incrementado de manera exponencial la violencia en las zonas rurales. Esa violencia no solamente está obligando a la gente a migrar, sino que, pues los está desalojando de sus tierras, no? Y normalmente esto se hace porque, hay otros intereses en esas tierras y las quieren, quieren las tierras, pero las quieren sin gente.

Y entonces se va a implementar el mecanismo de la violencia para que esa [00:50:00] gente se vea obligada a salir y por lo tanto, se vea obligada a migrar a donde sea, porque ya no puede vivir en paz en la comunidad donde nació, donde se acostumbra a vivir, no? Entonces la migración no es un fenómeno natural. Es un fenómeno que ha sido creado por el mismo capital, que lo necesita para sobrevivir como sistema capitalista, y que está quitándole la posibilidad de vivir bien a la gente que vive en lugares muy remotos donde no necesitaban incluso de su existencia como sistema.

Eso.

Chris: Gracias, Aldo. Sí, seguramente las causas de la migración muchas veces vienen del motor de capitalismo de [00:51:00] guerra, plagas y hambre.

Y podemos pensar más en que hay ciertas personas que que tienen que emigrar, que tienen que emigrar. No tienen opción. Y además, cuando se emigran y las noticias del dinero, del prestigio, privilegio, vuelve a los pueblos, a las familias que también el tema puede quedar en asuntos de ambición, envidia, deseo, que la gente que tiene opción puede entender las consecuencias a su propio pueblo, a su propia gente, a los que se quedan o dejan atrás, no? Y bueno, me gustaría en el nombre de nuestros oyentes, agradecerles muchísimo por sus tiempo y [00:52:00] presencia hoy por sus reflexiones y consideraciones por sus trabajos y compromisos en el mundo.

Lo agredezco mucho. Les agradezco mucho. Y hasta la próxima, gracias, Aldo. Gracias, Gloria.

Gloria: Igual, gracias!

Aldo: Pues mucho gusto. Mucho gusto. Gloria. Nos vemos. Chris, si.

Leave a comment

Subscribe now

English Transcription

Chris: [00:00:00] Welcome Aldo and welcome Gloria to the podcast the end of tourism. Thank you both for being willing to talk with me today about these topics. I'm curious if you two would be willing to give a little introduction or summary about yourselves.

Ah, ado, we didn't hear you.

Aldo: Well, about my trips, well, I don't travel. I hardly have any vacations. But because of work, I have had to go to different places in the world. We could say, basically because of the work I do?

Rather than going to see the places where I have been invited, what I have done is go and talk to the people who are in those places about the problems we have here in the region.

The problems we have in Mexico and [00:01:00] who has allowed me to travel to different places has been the problem of contamination by transgenic corn. So that has made it so that, with that anger that weighed on me in 2001, I have had the opportunity to go to other places to talk a little about that particular problem and many others that are related to it, not the issue of transgenics or the issue of agrochemicals or the issue of corporate control over food, over seeds as well.

So, let's say that in general, most of the trips I have made are related to these accents or to the rights of indigenous peoples as well.

Chris: Thanks, Aldo. And could you tell us where you are today?

Aldo: Eh? Well, today I am in Guelatao and it is my community and I am in the offices of my organization, which is the union of organizations of the Sierra Juarez.

Chris: Thank you very much, [00:02:00] Hello Aldo and Gloria.

Gloria: Yes, the same. I have rarely left the state, but I do know a lot of people who usually emigrate to the United States, which is where most of them live, but they don't emigrate much to other states. But most of them do emigrate to the United States. I have a lot of neighbors, family, and a lot of people from here in Coycoyan. They do emigrate more to the United States.

Chris: Okay. Thank you so much for uh, being on time with us today. So, although it's early in the conversation, my question is about how have you seen the return of migrants to their villages affect the community in your own places or towns?

Gloria: Yes, in how long has it affected the community? That many when they return, well, they already have other ideas, other culture, another way of seeing life and sometimes many no longer [00:03:00] want to participate in the community assemblies or they come with other techniques, let's say, of cultivation and the techniques that they had here before, well, they are already lost and I see more and more how this also affects their personal lives, because many when they return they already return sick, tired.

In the best of cases, many of them return with money, right? And that makes the people who are in the town see that since they did well, they also want to emigrate and then there are more people who want to migrate and they become more and they have the idea that, well, there is an opportunity for them to improve their lives in the United States.

But I say that in general the impact is both positive and [00:04:00] negative, because as I say, many return tired, sick. Many also leave their families here and when they return, their families can no longer find them, or some who leave their parents, when they return their parents have already died or there are situations like that that impact their personal life.

Chris: Thanks, Gloria. Aldo, would you like to respond?

Aldo: Although there aren't many of them here in the community of Guelatao, there isn't as much migration as in other nearby communities. Let's say that one of the things that we see that has affected us is that prices are rising, because they bring money and no longer work in the fields. So, they receive resources for their families.

And that makes them have a greater capacity to pay the waiters, for example, so that they can be the same . So, that makes the rest of the population feel affected, because they do not have the resources to be able to pay what a migrant is paying. Well, that to some extent is affecting corn production as well, in itself, it had already affected it, because many leave and stop working the land. Those who want their family to continue working the land send resources, but let's say that there the costs rise for the rest of the population because they pay higher salaries. So, if someone comes to the community to work, they will charge you more than they charged you before and many cannot pay it.

Then he tells us, "I'm not going to plant anymore, because the boy is too expensive." Right?

And that has a direct impact on the economy of those who do not migrate.

And since there are few migrants too, or I say [00:06:00] since there are few people who stay to work the fields in the community, there are no longer enough people to be able to do what we call gozona.

So let's all work together on the part of each of those who enter this type of work. Well, that is also an impact of migration, right?

Chris: And Gloria, do you think that the same dynamic exists or has happened in your town?

Gloria: No, I say that it is the same, yes, I agree with what they say and yes, it has greatly influenced the people who emigrate if they pay more than those who do not migrate. Yes, that change is very noticeable.

Chris: Thank you. Well, part of my interest or how I started, uh, approaching the immigration issue was partly because of my family. [00:07:00] They were also migrants from Macedonia and Greece, and the other side from England to Canada about 50 years ago. So what I've felt is that the dynamics, the consequences of migration on the people and the people who don't migrate, that there are patterns at the global level, and they are almost, well, very similar.

I found a book in English, but it also existed in Spanish. Eh? It's called The Right Not to Migrate or The Right To Stay Home by David Bacon. And that book, it's titled after a declaration that the people of FIOB or the Indigenous Front of Binational Organizations made there in Santiago Juxtlahuaca in La Mixteca,

After days and days of discussing the consequences of migration in the places of the migrants, that is, the native peoples of the migrants, a declaration was made: "the right not to migrate together with the right to migrate." So I'm curious to know if you could talk about those times and the declaration, if you know how it was formed or how it was received in the Mixteca or in the northern mountains of Oaxaca.

Aldo: Well, here in the organization, yes, we have talked about the right not to migrate, because we are interested in strengthening the identity of the people who live in our communities. Well, in the end, we are part of a larger community. It is not only our community, but there are several other communities that belong to the same people, to the Zapotec people, and in that sense, what we are trying to do is [00:09:00] What we have to do is strengthen our communities, strengthen our communality, which is our form of community organization, and for that reason we would prefer that people do not migrate.

But the problem is that there has been a brutal impoverishment of the countryside in general, not only in Mexico. We also see it in other countries, that those who emigrate are mainly people who leave the countryside and go to the United States to work in the fields in the United States, but in conditions that are completely different from how they worked in the community. Even here in Mexico, some go to work in the fields in the north of the country , too . It is in terrible conditions , with many agrochemicals.

People come back, in some cases they come back sick, right? Or they come back with their feet up, they said in the village, because [00:10:00] they are already dead. They come back just to be buried in the community. But well, they practically lived their whole life outside, right?

So, those who leave suffer because they long to be in the community. They want to eat what they eat in the community. They want to listen to the music of the community. They want to live as if they were in the community, but it is no longer there. Those who stay to live outside the community, let's say in the United States, especially, because their children will no longer understand them, because they are educated in a different way in schools that have nothing to do with their culture.

Let's say that they are mentally colonized in schools in the United States. There are very few schools that we could say have the capacity to be intercultural and teach in Spanish and English and [00:11:00] teach the culture of the community and the culture that is experienced in the United States, individualism.

So it is very difficult for a child of immigrants, born in the United States, to return to the community, because he or she has already adapted to another way, to another civilization, to another way of life completely different from the community. And well, that worries us. We are interested in people staying.

We know that it is difficult because there are few economic resources in the communities, but even so, we are making the effort so that people feel proud of their origins and do not have the need to migrate or, in the last case, if they have the need to emigrate, at least they have a reference of what their community is like and take it to wherever they are, [00:12:00] right?

Because sometimes people do it out of necessity. And that necessity takes you to other places, but if you feel proud of your cultural identity, you will take that identity wherever you are. In the case of the mountains, there are people from various communities who make a community where they are. But obviously they won't be able to do it in the same way as if they lived in the community, but at least they take something with them.

You can also take another way of seeing the world, although you won't be able to practice it like you would in your community, right? And in general, let's say the work we do in the organization is focused on strengthening different mechanisms so that people stay.

For example, right now we are working on establishing an agroecology school, so that young people have the tools to [00:13:00] be able to plant the land without depending on herbicides and all the agrochemicals that come with the green revolution and that are the ones normally used in the United States for agricultural production of most of the things that are done there.

And within this agroecology framework, obviously for us the cultural element is fundamental because we cannot do only agriculture outside of our territorial-cultural context. So, all of this has to be included in these initiatives that we are trying to promote.

Chris: Mm, yes. Thank you. Thank you, Aldo. And Gloria, that statement arose in the Mixteca region where you are and I would like to know if you remember the statement, if it was part of the politics or the people of your town?

Gloria: Well, I learned that this statement came about because of the great [00:14:00] injustices that migrants suffer. As it says something from the moment they leave their homes until they get there, let's say in the United States, where they have to work the same and continue to suffer physical and psychological abuse.

And what else would we want from people? Well, no, they wouldn't emigrate, no, but we know that they emigrate due to their needs, but I hope that those who emigrate have those opportunities so that if they want to emigrate as best they can and not go through suffering. Mm-hmm.

The declaration arose in this area of Juxtlahuaca, according to what I have found, I did not know much about this declaration, but because of this I have already checked. And yes, the declaration arose specifically because of the injustices that people suffer from leaving their homes until arriving in the United States.

All the abuses that they [00:15:00] end up suffering along the way and even many of them there, even if they are working there, they also continue to suffer. And for that reason, well, what more would people want than for them not to immigrate, right? What more would we want for all people to have the good fortune of having a dignified life in their country, in their land, so that they do not have to emigrate, but it happens, it happens that if they emigrate, it happens for many reasons that sometimes it is not within our reach to be able to help them, but let's say at least to offer them the opportunities so that they emigrate in the best way possible and do not have so many disadvantages at the time of emigrating.

Chris: Thank you. No, yes, my father's village, for example, was a peasant village in Greece and it is no longer abandoned, but when they left there were 800 people. And today there are about 50. And there are still about two, three peasants, so [00:16:00] I understand well what they are saying and how important it is to create the conditions so that people do not need to migrate if they do not need to.

But I would also like to ask you about the success that has perhaps existed. So, if there was a statement that came out of the truth, it is not very well known, despite the success of the book and those things. It is not very well known, from what I have seen in Mexico and from speaking with some people from FIOB in the United States, but we will get to that in a moment. I wanted to ask you if there are programs or have you seen certain successes within or through those programs, for example, that you mentioned Aldo and Glorias, if there is a change in the towns. If something has changed in those 15 years.

Glory: [00:17:00] Aha, from my side. I say yes. Yes, there has been a change. Maybe not a direct change. There has not been a declaration. Yes, it has helped, but we have not seen it because it is hardly mentioned. But there has been. Thanks to that, programs and projects have been created that have supported migrants, but which many times we are unaware of.

But yes, there is, let's say, the positive impact that this statement has generated.

Aldo: Well, in the case of the Sierra Juárez, the northern mountains of Oaxaca, let's say, there are some communities that have a high rate of migration and well, in some cases, some programs have arrived, for example, like "two for one," where the migrants, let's say, put up part of the resources, the state puts up another part or puts up two parts, let's say the federal government, the state government to do some work in the community.

But that really isn't [00:18:00] solving any problem, not because basically what it's doing is forcing migrants to contribute to doing some better work in their community and when those resources could be used for their families or for something else or to fulfill their community obligations, but not necessarily carrying out the actions that the government is obliged to do, such as social works or things of that sort.

So, I could say that the programs that have appeared in recent years have not helped us much to stop migration. For example, the most advertised program of the last six-year period was Sembrando Vida, right? And although that support was given to some farmers in some communities, not in all of them, we could [00:19:00] say that they were captured so that they would not migrate to the United States, but they stopped planting corn when initially the program was for them to plant more corn.

They made us plant little trees, not trees that in many cases were not even from the region, that were not going to grow well or if they were going to grow well, they were not going to be useful here, because they came from other regions or if they grew, it was no longer going to be possible to grow corn in those places because they would shade the corn.

We live on hillsides. There are no flat places here like in the United States, right? So, let's say that government programs that have benefited to some extent. The migratory flow that has made there less migration, well, they are not seen either. They are not seen very clearly. We see that policies continue to be established to destroy the community fabric , to expel the population . [00:20:00] from the countryside to the cities or to the United States.

Chris: Thanks, Aldo. And you mentioned that your work has a lot to do with the regeneration of corn, and obviously local corn as well. Why is it so important for the people in the face of the consequences of migration?

Aldo: Corn is a very important element for us. We could say that it is the heart of the community because we eat it every day. We say "native." Institutions in many places call it "criollo" out of habit, but the word is misused. We say that it is our native corn.

And it is not the same to eat a tortilla made from native corn, an ear of corn from our corn, than to buy an ear of corn that they now sell in the city that was made with [00:21:00] hybrid corn or that we have to eat tortillas made with transgenic corn. Unfortunately, in recent years, I think it happens not only in the mountains, but in many other places in the country, the use of tortilla factories has increased and so we no longer know what corn they are producing those tortillas with, but they cannot be compared to the tortillas made from our corn with our own technologies. Right?

So, I think that corn, for us, besides being our main food or the one we consume the most, also gives us identity. Corn, for example, calls us to work together, which is something that is not done in the United States. They all hire migrants to do their work, right? And they are going to produce what they are going to produce to sell here.

The corn that is planted [00:22:00] is normally for consumption. Corn is hardly sold. And for example, now that they are setting guaranteed prices, right? Guaranteed price is MXN $6. In our communities, corn, you cannot sell it for MXN $6, or at least, you sell it for MXN $20, if you sell it, because it is the effort of your work and also by the same people in the community or even by migrants or immigrant families, it is valued as a, a food that is completely different from the corn that is bought in the store, at CONASUPO or at Diconsa or in any commercial store or what comes from tortillas? So there is a special appreciation for our corn. That is important, but it is being produced less and less. Now previously, whoever had corn was considered rich. [00:23:00] From a comparative perspective of today, anyone who has corn is considered stupid or poor because he has no money. However, especially the older peasants who say, well, "if I have corn, I don't need money" to live because I have enough food.

Even before, for example, when people had to carry out their community duties, which were not paid in many communities, they started to pay for the position. The person who could occupy the position was an older agent, whose children had already grown up, but who also had corn so that he did not ask anyone for a favor about how he was going to pay for the food of his family for the year or the time that he had to be in charge of the community office.

So, let's say that corn also creates community? And with these policies, lack of support or [00:24:00] elimination of support, the Mexican countryside is also hurting our forms of community organization. That's it.

Chris: That's powerful. Yes, I remembered what you said, Aldo, some words that the philosopher Ivan Illich wrote, and I don't know if it's exactly what he wrote, but he basically said that for almost all of human history, the greatest measure of poverty was whether or not one had to buy one's food. That is, if you had to buy your food in the past, it was a sign, a measure of poverty, to say that you are poor if you have to buy. Gloria, do you have anything to add to that point?

Gloria: Not that point, no,

Chris: [00:25:00] Okay, okay. Well, I would also like to continue with what you mentioned, Aldo, about the resources and what are called remittances, and from what I have seen in the statistics, they do not say that more or less six percent of the Mexican economy is made up of remittances sent by family or friends in the United States.

In some of the villages I have been invited to, I have been told that the village would not survive without remittances. In others, I have been told that the village would survive much better if people did not leave. This is a very complex issue and I wonder if the two of you could talk about that complexity that you have seen in your villages and elsewhere as a result of remittances.

[00:26:00] goes beyond that topic to a vital or central question, which is whether a person can or cannot be responsible for one place while being in another place?

Gloria: I say yes. Remittances have had a positive influence because thanks to them there have been many businesses, commerce and I feel that if we took away those remittances, those businesses would fall, because the money that many people spend in those businesses is money that their relatives send from the United States. Thanks to that, they buy their food, the materials they need from school supplies to personal things they need. And if in remittances, I feel that yes, it would be complicated because as until now, there are not enough opportunities within the country to be able to satisfy that demand, I feel that if we [00:27:00] took them away, yes, it would have a very strong negative impact.

Aldo: I was saying that Monday is market day in Ixtlan. It is the largest community in this region. And when you arrive at the island, the first thing you see is the line at the bank. It is a longer line than any other day. Most of the people who are there are going to receive remittances and then spend them at the market. In the best case scenario, it would be good if they bought things from the region, but many of the things they buy are also processed. They come from outside, right? Even something that is a bit scary sometimes is seeing how the ladies take away your packages of maruchan, right?

So he says that's what [00:28:00] the children are going to eat. And yes, they are changing the children's diet because it's easier to boil the soup that already comes in that box, you pour it in water, it boils and even the food.

So, if we receive resources that support the family, they are changing our way of life, because we cannot survive as our ancestors, our parents, our grandparents did before, but they are changing our lives and making us dependent on money. They are making us individualists too because now having money can be a thing of prestige, right?

But remittances are not really solving a fundamental problem in the community. They are solving a problem of imposed survival, right? [00:29:00] Because they take away your way of being, they take away your way of living in a community and they impose on you an individual way of life that is based on money and not on family relationships or community relationships that existed before.

So, let's say that remittances are going to help you live. They're going to help you buy things, right? Many of those things are not going to be local. That is, the money arrives in the community and leaves the community for those who bought things outside the community and came to sell here, right?

But then it is helping, we could say that the capitalist economy is not helping the community economy. Even if it is people from the community who sell the things, right? Let's say that it may be that a part stays in the community because the community merchant went to the city, bought the things and brought them here.

He's going to keep his profit, but he's ultimately doing the job for the [00:30:00] capitalist who produced those things and brought them to the community through that merchant. So the remittances are helping to strengthen the capitalist system and destroy the community system.

Chris: Last night, a friend told me that there are some towns here in Oaxaca that have just met in their assemblies to talk about the possibility of Trump's threat in the United States to deport all migrants.

Well, not all migrants, but migrants who are not satisfied with Trump's world there in the United States. And what would happen? I mean, people in the assemblies are talking about what would happen if that were to happen? Yes, suddenly there are hundreds, if not thousands, of companions and [00:31:00] relatives who suddenly arrive back to the town and obviously without those funds? Maybe it's a bit of what happened during the pandemic. There were also many stories of people from the north there, returning to their towns. And they started to work in the cornfields, but then they went back north to work.

Gloria: Yes, well, if that threat were to come true and all the migrants returned, I feel that it would be very complicated for the country to support all those migrants, because up until now there are not many opportunities. Let's say there is a program, the more well-known Sembrando Vida program, but it is doing very little of the work that it should be doing.

And if all the migrants were to return, we would be stuck, as it would be a negative impact, I feel, because we do not have the possibility of [00:32:00] receiving them. We do not have the opportunities, we do not have programs, we do not have, there are many things that will not favor us, because they, if they return, they will see many migrants, but without a livelihood, without something that can sustain them so that they have a life more or less like the one they already had when they were there.

And because it will not only affect them, but also their families who are here seeing that their relatives who were there will now be here.

Chris: Thank you. Gloria. Yes, Aldo.

Aldo: Well, some people are starting to ask me. We see that, even in the United States, there are some migrants who voted for Trump. Many who voted for Trump. Talking to some people, let's say that those who pay taxes and already have their residence in the United States, see documented migrants as a hindrance, as competition [00:33:00] unfair, because they are not obliged to pay taxes. And then no.

Because it is part of the model, the designed capitalist model. Let's say that among Mexican immigrants themselves, there are contradictions, there is discrimination. Let's say a migrant who is already a resident, sometimes will not support an illegal migrant because it could take away a job.

And well, this puts us in a complex situation at the end of the day, because even these migrants voted for Donald Trump. They would agree that similar migrants should be deported.

It's an extreme. Now, migrants in general, if they are deported, undocumented migrants and they are deported, will they affect the economy of the United States as well? No? Because there are many things that would stop working in the United States if there were no immigrants. [00:34:00] I mean, who is going to take care of the elderly, for example?

Many migrants, especially women, are dedicated to caring for sick people or elderly people who do not have family or who, if they do have family, are practically abandoned or live on their pension and can no longer lead a normal life because they have some illness, etc.

And they need people to run them. Usually it is Mexicans or undocumented migrants who do this kind of work. This sector of the US population should be affected. Farmers who plant crops, let's say, to sell their products in the US market, most of them hire undocumented migrants.

So they are also going to have a problem with their agricultural production going down because there will be no migrants. And there are other sectors of the economy in the United States that would also be affected. I don't know [00:35:00] if Trump is not seeing it or is pretending not to see it or if it is just a bluff, so to speak.

And this is like a threat that will not be fulfilled because ultimately it would affect the economy of the United States. If it were to be carried out, even partially, which is most likely, then the migrants who were deported to Mexico, we do not know if they bring remittances or not. We do not know if they had savings or not.

Some may, some may not. Many of those who return are no longer accustomed to living in a community or in their community. They are not accustomed to living in the countryside and would prefer to live in the city, but there will not be jobs in the city. There will not be enough jobs for them to live a less [00:36:00] rural life, let's say, when they return to Mexico.

Some others say, well, if they deport me, I'll go back to planting corn and nothing will happen, but I don't think that's the majority or I don't think that's the totality, at least not those who will return to their community.

Those who have worked in the community since they were children and know how to do field work will not have a problem, but those who have become accustomed to doing non-agricultural activities and have been forced to migrate will have the problem of not knowing what to do when they return to this country or when they are forced to return to this country.

Chris: Yeah, I remember reading a book a few years ago, and it was kind of weird because the book was published in 1940. And it was a social history of migration coming into the United States in the [00:37:00] previous century and it basically said that if they came like the Germans or a wave of German migrants. Those who were already there hated the Germans because the Germans were willing to pay more rent and accept less income from work. And then another 10 years, it happens right? And maybe there are more Germans now, but the Ukrainians are coming and the Germans are angry because the Ukrainians are ready to pay more rent and work for less. And then the Germans go to the periphery or they find new towns or cities. They migrate, basically.

And it is a cycle that we see to this day in what you said Aldo regarding people who already have residency in the United States, for example, Mexicans saying that, "well no more, I already have mine, [00:38:00] so no one else," right? That has a very, very long history.

And also, the thing that I grew up in Toronto in Canada. Canada is known and promoted as a country of multiculturalism. I mean, the vast majority of our parents are from other countries. I mean, it is a country of immigrants. But, we grew up with this national idea that the population of the country was always decreasing, meaning fewer and fewer people every generation. So, that is why we had to invite and accept a lot of immigrants every year, meaning, a lot, a lot.

But reading the social stories, I realized that those invitations and sense of being open to others were not part of the compassion of the Canadian country.

It was because [00:39:00] they needed more and more, quote unquote "cheap labor," meaning people who were willing to do the jobs that no one else wanted to do and for money that no one else wanted to work for. And so the state had to keep inviting, bringing in people from outside to do that work.

And the question would be, then perhaps, what would we do? As Gloria said, to ensure that there is decent work, there is a decent life for people. And I say this because when I spoke with a representative of FIOB who was a representative of FIOB in 2009 during the declaration against migration. And I asked him then, why has that declaration not gone viral or popular in the United States and other countries? And he told me "ah, well, no, it's that in the United States, the thing is that if you are on the left side of [00:40:00] politics, you couldn't criticize anything about migration." I mean, all migration is nice, right? There is no mirror to reality, but if you criticize migration in any way, you are automatically part of the right or the extreme right. You are a son of Trump, etc.

Aldo: In fact, for example, Trump, we couldn't say that he's a Native American, right? Native Americans don't have orange hair. So he came from another country, he came from Europe. And well, maybe now he feels like an American and doesn't want others to go to that country illegally, like maybe his parents came to the United States to pay expensive rents and receive low salaries.

But he has already adapted to the capitalist style of the United States. He has [00:41:00] United States citizenship and now he does not want others to migrate. But I also do not think he wants to recognize the rights of Native Americans who have lived there for many more generations than the family of many others who now feel American.

I was watching a video a few days ago about how some families in Mongolia live. Mongolia is a country where there are still nomadic shepherds who do not live in a city or in an agricultural community. They live in a wide territory and follow their livestock, which changes location, defending it from the season of the year.

They don't need to emigrate. I mean, they've lived their life this way for a long time, for many generations. And they don't even need the economic resources to [00:42:00] buy things because they don't need so many things. They're in a tent so they can go somewhere else, maybe with the most basic furniture to be able to live inside their tent, and that's it.

And that doesn't mean they are poor. Capitalism measures poverty based on economic income. If you earn less than a day, then you are a very poor person. But... money is not going to solve all the problems in the world. So, I think we have to start looking at ourselves in a different way and see that economic resources are not the only solution for life.

We have been led to believe this in recent years. So, today, those who do not have money are poor, right? But I think that there are other ways in which most of humanity has lived on this planet that were not like this capitalist way of life that is being imposed on us today, right? And they are imposing it on us because [00:43:00] there are fewer and fewer people who want to control the world economy.

I mean, we see it. There are fewer and fewer national companies that have, for example, the seed and nursery business that existed in Mexico 30 years ago, which has disappeared in recent years. And now, four large companies worldwide have them. Obviously, they want to have the seed business, and if they don't want anyone else to have a seed business or for farmers to not have their own seeds to survive, then they are expropriating the possibility of generating a life in a different way, right? So they are going to force us, or they want to force us, to make our lives depend on what they can sell us, and make those other ways of surviving on the planet disappear.

I believe that these other forms, although very deteriorated, [00:44:00] very battered, are still valid in many places and there will be people who want to claim them, we want to claim them and we believe that there is another way of living on this planet. There are many other ways of living on your planet that are.

Chris: Thanks, Aldo. This Gloria, would you like to add anything?

Gloria: Yes, well, maybe the reason why the declaration is not so famous is because, as Aldo says, we are so focused on capitalism that if for a moment we did not focus on that area of capitalism, I feel that everyone would say that they have a decent life on their lands and they would stay longer, but since we are all focused on the material, on money and all that, we say why are we going to give so much mention to the declaration, if it is not useful, [00:45:00] supposedly?

But it's because we've had this idea of capitalism so much that we always want to see money, everything that capitalism implies, and we forget a little about what it really means to have a decent life, because we are rich in many things, right? We have water, we have land. And we could be happy with that. But we're not satisfied with that. We always want more because those are the ideas that capitalism has put into us. Mm-hmm.

Chris: Thank you, Gloria. Anyway, for me, even though I've spent a lot of time visiting and working in some towns in Oaxaca, growing up in a modern, Western, urban metropolis, etc., I have to imagine a decent life. I didn't grow up in a society where they could point to an example of a decent life.

[00:46:00] In that book that you wrote by David be David Bacon about the most recent wave or caravan of migrants heading to the United States, this time from this Venezuela, it was mentioned in 2023 I believe, there are an estimated 200,000 migrants entering the United States. Given those numbers and the various crises that force people to move in our times, what advice or comments would you give to people, whether they are indigenous peasants or modern people who see migration as the only answer?

Gloria: Yes. Yes. Well, the advice I would give would be that if you have the possibilities, as I say, if you have them.

Even if they don't [00:47:00] have much, no, but if I was born in an area where there is no violence, where more or less, if they can live more or less, if they can have a decent life or something that can be compared to a decent life, then they should stay there. There is no need. Well, yes. You know, there is a need, but they should not be forced to migrate?

Because it is complicated, it is difficult, everything they are going to suffer, everything that it implies, as I say, also a principle, many emigrate to improve their lives, but also to improve the lives of their families. But many, when those families for whom they left return, when they return, they no longer find that family. It is already dead.

Many of us, who have reasons for emigrating, left to give a better life to our parents, but our parents have already died and we have not returned yet. And life was supposed to give us a better life, but it never happened. We are simply surviving, but we have never, ever fulfilled that dream.

And I say, the advice I would give them is that if they have the possibility of having a decent life in their lands, then they should stay there and not see migration as the great dream, as we all imagine it, right?

Aldo: Well, I think that migration is not a decision of the people who are forced to migrate. There are many factors. The United States needs cheap labor, as you said. So, even though Trump says he doesn't want emigrants, he does want migrants. And what is happening in Venezuela, well, at the end of the day, it is part of the policies that were made in the United States, right? That is where they put that country in crisis.

And then a ticket from the United States arrived [00:49:00] and told his fellow countrymen that they were immigrating to the United States. They were going to be welcomed. They never imagined the ordeal they had to endure in transit to get to the United States. And when they get to the United States, they are not welcomed as well as they had been promised would be, right?

And in Mexico, we see now in our country, for example, how violence in rural areas has increased exponentially. This violence is not only forcing people to migrate, but it is also evicting them from their lands, right? And normally this is done because there are other interests in those lands and they want them, they want the land, but they want them without people.

And then the mechanism of violence will be implemented so that these [00:50:00] people are forced to leave and therefore, they are forced to migrate wherever, because they can no longer live in peace in the community where they were born, where they are used to living, right? So migration is not a natural phenomenon. It is a phenomenon that has been created by capital itself , which needs it to survive as a capitalist system , and which is taking away the possibility of living well from people who live in very remote places where they did not even need its existence as a system.

That.

Chris: Thanks, Aldo. Yes, surely the causes of migration often come from the capitalist engine of [00:51:00] war, plagues and hunger.

And we can think more about the fact that there are certain people who have to emigrate, who have to emigrate. They have no choice. And also, when they emigrate and the news of money, prestige, privilege, returns to the villages, to the families, the issue can also be left in matters of ambition, envy, desire, that people who have a choice can understand the consequences for their own town, their own people, for those who stay or leave behind, right? And well, I would like on behalf of our listeners, to thank them very much for their time and [00:52:00] presence today for their reflections and considerations for their work and commitments in the world.

I really appreciate it. I really appreciate you. And until next time, thank you, Aldo. Thank you, Gloria.

Gloria: Same, thanks!

Aldo: Nice to meet you. Nice to meet you. Gloria. See you later.

Leave a comment

Subscribe now

S6 #7 | Ecologias de los Medios | Carlos Scolari

Chris Christou — Tue, 17 Jun 2025 14:02:26 GMT

Mi entrevistado en este episodio es Carlos A. Scolari, Catedrático del Departamento de Comunicación de la Universitat Pompeu Fabra – Barcelona. Ha sido Investigador Principal de diversos proyectos de investigación internacionales y estatales, desde el proyecto H2020 TRANSLITERACY (entre 2015 y 2018) hasta el proyecto LITERAC_IA, que comenzó en 2024 y dirige junto a María del Mar Guerrero. Sus últimos libros son Cultura Snack (2020), La guerra de las plataformas (2022) y Sobre la evolución de los medios (2024). Ahora está trabajando en un libro sobre los fósiles mediáticos.

Notas del Episodio

Historia de ecologia de los medios
Historia de Carlos
Diferencias entre el anglosfero y el hispanosfero
La coevolucion entre tecnologia y humanos
La democratizacion de los medios
Evolucion de los medios
Alienacion y addiccion
Como usar los medios conscientemente

Tarea

Carlos A. Scolari - Pagina Personal - Facebook - Instagram - Twitter - Escolar Google

Sobre la evolución de los medios

Hipermediaciones (Libros)

Subscribe now

Transcrito en espanol (English Below)

Chris: [00:00:00] Bienvenido al podcast el fin de turismo Carlos. Gracias por poder hablar conmigo hoy. Es un gran gusto tener tu presencia aquí conmigo hoy.

Carlos: No gracias a ti, Chris, por la invitación. Es un enorme placer honor charlar contigo, gran viajero y bueno, yo nunca investigué directamente el tema del turismo.

Pero bueno, entiendo que vamos a hablar de ecología de los medios y temas colaterales que nos pueden servir para entender mejor, darle un sentido a todo esto que está pasando en el mundo del turismo. Bueno, yo trabajo en Barcelona. No vivo exactamente en la ciudad, pero trabajo, en la universidad en Barcelona, en la zona céntrica.

Y bueno, cada vez que voy a la ciudad cada día se incrementa la cantidad de turistas y se incrementa el debate sobre el turismo, en todas sus dimensiones. Así que es un tema que está la orden del día, no?

Chris: Sí, pues me imagino que aunque si no te gusta pensar o si no quieres pensar en el turismo allá, es inevitable tener como una enseñanza [00:01:00] personal de esa industria.

Carlos: Sí, hasta que se está convirtiendo casi en un criterio taxonómico, no? ...de clasificación o ciudades con mucho turista ciudades o lugares sin turistas que son los más buscados hasta que se llenan de turistas. Entonces estamos en un círculo vicioso prácticamente.

Chris: Ya pues, que en algún memento se que se cambia, se rompe el ciclo, al menos para dar cuenta de lo que estamos haciendo con el comportamiento.

Y, yo entiendo que eso también tiene mucho que ver con la ecología de los medios, la falta de capacidad de entender nuestros comportamientos, actitudes, pensamientos, sentimientos, etcétera. Entonces, antes de seguir por tu trabajo y obras, este me gustaría preguntarte de tu camino y de tu vida.

Primero me pregunto si podrías definir para nuestros oyentes qué es la ecología de los medios y cómo te [00:02:00] interesó en este campo? Cómo llegaste a dedicar a tu vida a este estudio?

Carlos: Sí. A ver un poco. Hay una, esta la historia oficial. Diríamos de la ecología de los medios o en inglés "media ecology," es una campo de investigación, digamos, eh, que nace en los años 60. Hay que tener en cuenta sobre todos los trabajos de Marshall McLuhan, investigador canadiense muy famoso a nivel mundial. Era quizá el filósofo investigador de los medios más famosos en los años 60 y 70.

Y un colega de el, Neil Postman, que estaba en la universidad de New York en New York University un poco, digamos entre la gente que rodeaba estos dos referentes, no, en los años 60, de ahí se fue cocinando, diríamos, lo que después se llamó la media ecology. Se dice que el primero que habló de media ecology que aplicó esta metáfora a los medios, fue el mismo Marshall McLuhan en algunas, conversaciones privadas, [00:03:00] cartas que se enviaban finales dos años 50, a principios de los 60, se enviaban los investigadores investigadora de estos temas?

Digamos la primera aparición pública del concepto de media ecology fue una conferencia en el año 1968 de Neil Postman. Era una intervención pública que la hablaba de un poco como los medios nos transforman y transforman los medios formar un entorno de nosotros crecemos, nos desarrollamos, no. Y nosotros no somos muy conscientes a veces de ese medio que nos rodea y nos modela.

El utilizó por primera vez el concepto de media ecology en una conferencia pública. Y ya, si vamos a principio de los años 70, el mismo Postman crea en NYU, en New York University crea el primer programa en media ecology. O sea que ya en el 73, 74 y 75, empieza a salir lo que yo llamo la segunda generación, de gente [00:04:00] formada algunos en estos cursos de New York.

Por ejemplo Christine Nystrom fue la primera tesis doctoral sobre mi ecology; gente como, Paul Levinson que en el año 1979 defiende una tesis doctoral dirigida por Postman sobre evolución de los medios, no? Y lo mismo pasaba en Toronto en los años 70. El Marshall McLuhan falleció en el diciembre del 80.

Digamos que los años 70 fueron su última década de producción intelectual. Y hay una serie de colaboradores en ese memento, gente muy joven como Robert Logan, Derrick De Kerchove, que después un poco siguieron trabajando un poco todo esta línea, este enfoque. Y ahí hablamos del frente canadiense, eh?

Toda esta segunda generación fue desarrollando, fue ampliando aplicando. No nos olvidemos de Eric McLuhan, el hijo de Marshall, que también fue parte de toda esta movida. [00:05:00] Y si no recuerdo mal en el año 2000, se crea la asociación la Media Ecology Association, que es la Asociación de Ecología de los Medios, que es una organización académica, científica, que nuclea a la gente que se ocupa de media ecology.

Si pensamos a nivel más científico epistemológico, podemos pensar esta metáfora de la ecología de los medios desde dos o tres perspectivas. Por un lado, esta idea de que los medios crean ambientes. Esta es una idea muy fuerte de Marsha McLuhan, de Postman y de todo este grupo, no? Los medios - "medio" entendido en sentido muy amplio, no, cualquier tecnología podría ser un medio para ellos.

Para Marsha McLuhan, la rueda es un medio. Un un telescopio es un medio. Una radio es un medio y la televisión es un medio, no? O sea, cualquier tecnología puede considerarse un medio. Digamos que estos medios, estas tecnologías, generan un [00:06:00] ambiente que a nosotros nos transforma. Transforma nuestra forma, a veces de pensar nuestra forma de percibir el mundo, nuestra concepción del tiempo del espacio.

Y nosotros no somos conscientes de ese cambio. Pensemos que, no sé, antes de 1800, si alguien tenía que hacer un viaje de mil kilómetros (y acá nos acercamos al turismo) kilómetros era un viaje que había que programarlo muchos meses antes. Con la llegada del tren, ya estamos en 1800, esos kilómetros se acortaron. Digamos no? Ahí vemos como si a nosotros hoy nos dicen 1000 kilómetros.

Bueno, si, tomamos un avión. Es una hora, una hora y cuarto de viaje. Hoy 1000 kilómetro es mucho menos que hace 200 años y incluso a nivel temporal, se a checo el tiempo. No? Todo eso es consecuencia, digamos este cambio, nuestra percepción es consecuencia de una serie de medios y tecnologías.

El ferrocarril. Obviamente, hoy tenemos los aviones. Las mismas redes digitales que, un poco nos han llevado esta idea de "tiempo [00:07:00] real," esta ansiedad de querer todo rápido, no? También esa es consecuencia de estos cambios ambientales generados por los medios y las tecnologías, eh? Esto es un idea muy fuerte, cuando McLuhan y Postman hablaban de esto en los años 60, eran fuertes intuiciones que ellos tenían a partir de una observación muy inteligente de la realidad. Hoy, las ciencias cognitivas, mejor las neurociencia han confirmado estas hipótesis. O sea, hoy existen una serie de eh metodología para estudiar el cerebro y ya se ve como las tecnologías.

Los medios afectan incluso la estructura física del cerebro. No? Otro tema que esto es histórico, que los medios afectan nuestra memoria. Esto viene de Platón de hace 2500 años, que él decía que la escritura iba a matar la memoria de los hombres. Bueno, podemos pensar nosotros mismos, no, eh?

O por lo menos esta generación, que [00:08:00] vivimos el mundo antes y después de las aplicaciones móviles. Yo hace 30 años, 25 años, tenía mi memoria 30-40 números telefónicos. Hoy no tengo ninguno. Y en esa pensemos también el GPS, no? En una época, los taxistas de Londres, que es una ciudad latica se conocían a memoria la ciudad. Y hoy eso, ya no hace falta porque tienen GPS.

Y cuando han ido a estudiar el cerebro de los taxistas de Londres, han visto que ciertas áreas del cerebro se han reducido, digamos, así, que son las áreas que gestionaban la parte espacial. Esto ya McLuhan, lo hablaba en los años 60. Decía como que los cambios narcotizan ciertas áreas de la mente decía él.

Pero bueno, vemos que mucha investigación empírica, bien de vanguardia científica de neurociencia está confirmando todas estos pensamientos, todas estas cosas que se decían a los años 60 en adelante, por la media ecology. Otra posibilidad es entender [00:09:00] esto como un ecosistema de medios, Marshall McLuhan siempre decía no le podemos dar significado,

no podemos entender un medio aislado de los otros medios. Como que los medios adquieren sentido sólo en relación con otros medios. También Neil Postman y mucha otra gente de la escuela de la media ecology, defiende esta posición, de que, bueno, los medios no podemos entender la historia del cine si no la vinculamos a los videojuegos, si no lo vinculamos a la aparición de la televisión.

Y así con todos los medios, no? Eh? Hay trabajos muy interesantes. Por ejemplo, de como en el siglo 19, diferentes medios, podríamos decir, que coevolucionaron entre sí. La prensa, el telégrafo. El tren, que transportaba los diarios también, aparecen las agencias de noticias. O sea, vemos cómo es muy difícil entender el desarrollo de la prensa en el siglo XIX y no lo vinculamos al teléfono, si no lo vinculamos a la fotografía, si no lo vinculamos a la radio fotografía, [00:10:00] también más adelante.

O sea, esta idea es muy fuerte. No también es otro de los principios para mí fundamentales de esta visión, que sería que los medios no están solos, forman parte de un ecosistema y si nosotros queremos entender lo que está pasando y cómo funciona todo esto, no podemos, eh, analizar los medios aislados del resto.

Hay una tercera interpretación. Ya no sé si es muy metafórica. No? Sobre todo, gente en Italia como el investigador Fausto Colombo de Milán o Michele Cometa, es un investigador de Sicilia, Michele Cometa que él habla de l giro, el giro ecomedial. Estos investigadores están moviéndose en toda una concepción según la cual, estamos en único ecosistema mediático que está contaminado.

Está contaminado de "fake news" está contaminado de noticias falsas, está contaminado de discursos de odio, etcétera, etc. Entonces ellos, digamos, retoman esta metáfora ecológica para decir [00:11:00] precisamente tenemos que limpiar este ecosistema así como el ecosistema natural está contaminado, necesita una intervención de limpieza, digamos así de purificación, eh?

También el ecosistema mediático corre el mismo peligro, no? Y esta gente también llama la atención, y yo estoy muy cerca de esta línea de trabajo sobre la dimensión material de la comunicación. Y esto también tiene que ver con el turismo, queriendo, no? El impacto ambiental que tiene la comunicación hoy.

Entrenar una inteligencia artificial implica un consumo eléctrico brutal; mantener funcionando las redes sociales, eh, tiktok, youtube, lo que sea, implica millones de servidores funcionando que chupan energía eléctrica y hay que enfriarlos además, consumiendo aún más energía eléctrica. Y eso tiene un impacto climático no indiferente.

Así que, bueno, digamos, vemos que está metáfora de lo ecológico, aplicado los medios da para dos o tres interpretaciones.

Chris: Mmm. [00:12:00] Wow. Siento que cuando yo empecé tomando ese curso de de Andrew McLuhan, el nieto de Marshall, como te mencioné, cambio mi perspectiva totalmente - en el mundo, en la manera como entiendo y como no entiendo también las nuestras tecnologías, mis movimientos, etcétera, pero ya, por una persona que tiene décadas de estudiando eso, me gustaría saber de de como empezaste. O sea, Andrew, por ejemplo tiene la excusa de su linaje, no de su papá y su abuelo.

Pero entonces, como un argentino joven empezó aprendiendo de ecología de medios.

Carlos: Bueno, yo te comento. Yo estudié comunicación en argentina en Rosario. Terminé la facultad. El último examen el 24 de junio del 86, que fue el día que nacía el Lionel Messi en Rosario, en Argentina el mismo día. Y [00:13:00] yo trabajaba, colaboraba en una asignatura en una materia que era teorías de la comunicación.

E incluso llegué a enseñar hasta el año 90, fueron tres años, porque ya después me fui vivir Italia. En esa época, nosotros leíamos a Marshall McLuhan, pero era una lectura muy sesgada ideológicamente. En América latina, tú lo habrás visto en México. Hay toda una historia, una tradición de críticas de los medios, sobre todo, a todo lo que viene de estados unidos y Canadá está muy cerca de Estados Unidos.

Entonces, digamos que en los años 70 y 80 y y hasta hoy te diría muchas veces a Marshall McLuhan se lo criticó mucho porque no criticaba los medios. O sea el te tenía una visión. Él decía, Neil Postman, si tenía una visión muy crítica. Pero en ese caso, este era una de las grandes diferencias entre Postman y McLuhan, que Marshall McLuhan, al menos en [00:14:00] público, él no criticaba los medios. Decía bueno, yo soy un investigador, yo envío sondas. Estoy explorando lo que pasa.

Y él nunca se sumó... Y yo creo que eso fue muy inteligente por parte de él... nunca se sumó a este coro mundial de crítica a los medios de comunicación. En esa época, la televisión para mucha gente era un monstruo.

Los niños no tenían que ver televisión. Un poco lo que pasa hoy con los móviles y lo que pasa hoy con tiktok. En esa época en la televisión, el monstruo. Entonces, había mucha investigación en Estados Unidos, que ya partía de la base que la televisión y los medios son malos para la gente.

Vemos que es una historia que se repite. Yo creo que en ese sentido, Marshall McLuhan, de manera muy inteligente, no se sumó ese coro crítico y él se dedico realmente a pensar los medios desde una perspectiva mucho más libre, no anclada por esta visión yo creo demasiado ideologizada, que en América Latina es muy fuerte. Es muy fuerte. Esto no implica [00:15:00] bajar la guardia, no ser crítico. Al contrario.

Pero yo creo que el el verdadero pensamiento crítico parte de no decir tanto ideológica, decimos "esto ya es malo. Vamos a ver esto." Habrá cosas buenas. Habrá cosas mala. Habrá cosa, lo que es innegable, que los medios mas ya que digamos son buenos son va, nos transforman. Y yo creo que eso fue lo importante de la idea McLuhaniana.

Entonces mi primer acercamiento a McLuhan fue una perspectiva de los autores críticos que, bueno, sí, viene de Estados Unidos, no critica los medios. Vamos a criticarlo a nosotros a él, no? Y ese fue mi primer acercamiento a Marshall McLuhan.

Yo me fui a Italia en la decada de 90. Estuve casi ocho años fuera de la universidad, trabajando en medios digitales, desarrollo de páginas, webs, productos multimédia y pretexto. Y a finales de los 90, dije quiero volver a la universidad. Quiero ser un doctorado. Y dije, "quiero hacer un doctorado. Bueno. Estando en Italia, el doctorado iba a ser de semiótica." Entonces hizo un [00:16:00] doctorado. Mi tesis fue sobre semiótica de las interfaces.

Ahi tuve una visión de las interfaces digitales que consideran que, por ejemplo, los instrumentos como el mouse o joystick son extensiones de nuestro cuerpo, no? El mouse prolonga la mano y la mete dentro de la pantalla, no? O el joystick o cualquier otro elemento de la interfaz digital? Claro. Si hablamos de que el mouse es una extensión de la mano, eso es una idea McLuhaniana.

Los medios como extensiones del ser humano de sujeto. Entonces, claro ahi yo releo McLuhan en italiano a finales de los años 90, y me reconcilio con McLuhan porque encuentro muchas cosas interesantes para entender precisamente la interacción con las máquinas digitales.

En el a 2002, me mudo con mi familia a España. Me reintegro la vida universitaria. [00:17:00] Y ahí me pongo a estudiar la relación entre los viejos y los nuevos medios. Entonces recupero la idea de ecosistema. Recupero toda la nueva, la idea de ecología de mi ecology. Y me pongo a investigar y releer a McLuhan por tercera vez.

Y a leerlo en profundidad a él y a toda la escuela de mi ecology para poder entender las dinámicas del actual ecosistema mediático y entender la emergencia de lo nuevo y cómo lo viejo lucha por adaptarse.

En el 2009, estuve tres meses trabajando con Bob Logan en the University of Toronto. El año pasado, estuve en el congreso ahí y tuvimos dos pre conferencias con gente con Paolo Granata y todo el grupo de Toronto.

O sea que, tengo una relación muy fuerte con todo lo que se producía y se produce en Toronto. Y bueno, yo creo que, a mí hoy, la media ecology, me sirve muchísimo junto a otras disciplina como la semiótica para poder entender el ecosistema [00:18:00] mediático actual y el gran tema de investigación mío hoy, que es la evolución del la ecosistema mediático.

Mm, digamos que dentro de la media ecology, empezando de esa tesis doctoral del 79 de Paul Levinson, hay toda una serie de contribuciones, que un poco son los que han ido derivando en mi último libro que salió el año pasado en inglés en Routledge, que se llama The Evolution of Media y acaba de salir en castellano.

Qué se llama Sobre La Evolución De los Medios. En la teoría evolutiva de los medios, hay mucha ecología de los medios metidos.

Chris: Claro, claro. Pues felicidad es Carlos. Y vamos a volver en un ratito de ese tema de la evolución de medios, porque yo creo que es muy importante y obviamente es muy importante a ti. Ha sido como algo muy importante en tu trabajo. Pero antes de de salir de esa esquina de pensamiento, hubo una pregunta que me mandó Andrew McLuhan para ti, que ya ella contestaste un poco, pero este tiene que ver entre las diferencias en los [00:19:00] mundos de ecología de medios anglofonos y hispánicos. Y ya mencionaste un poco de eso, pero desde los tiempos en los 80 y noventas, entonces me gustaría saber si esas diferencias siguen entre los mundos intelectuales, en el mundo anglofono o hispánico.

Y pues, para extender su pregunta un poco, qué piensas sería como un punto o tema o aspecto más importante de lo que uno de esos mundos tiene que aprender el otro en el significa de lo que falta, quizás.

Carlos: Si nos focalizamos en el trabajo de Marshall McLuhan, no es que se lo criticó sólo de América Latina.

En Europa no caía simpático Marshall McLuhan en los 60, 70. Justamente por lo mismo, porque no criticaba el sistema capitalista de medios. La tradición europea, la tradición de la Escuela de Frankfurt, la escuela de una visión anti [00:20:00] capitalista que denuncia la ideología dominante en los medio de comunicación.

Eso es lo que entra en América Latina y ahí rebota con mucha fuerza. Quizá la figura principal que habla desde América Latina, que habló mucho tiempo de América latina es Armand Mattelart. Matterlart es un teórico en la comunicación, investigador de Bélgica.

Y él lo encontramos ya a mediados de los años 60 finales de los 60 en Chile en un memento muy particular de la historia de Chile donde había mucha politización y mucha investigación crítica, obviamente con el con con con con el capitalismo y con el imperialismo estadounidense.

Quizá la la obra clásica de ese memento es el famoso libro de Mattelart y Dorfman, eh, eh? Para Leer El Pato Donald, que donde ellos desmontan toda la estructura ideológica capitalista, imperialista, que había en los cics en las historietas del pato Donald.

Ellos dicen esto se publicó a [00:21:00] principio los 70. Es quizá el libro más vendido de la comic latinoamericana hasta el día de hoy, eh? Ellos dicen hay ideología en la literatura infantil. Con el pato Donald, le están llenando la cabeza a nuestros niños de toda una visión del mundo muy particular.

Si uno le el pato Donald de esa época, por lo menos, la mayor parte de las historia del pato Donald, que era, había que a buscar un tesoro y adónde. Eran lugares africana, peruviana, incaica o sea, eran países del tercer mundo. Y ahí el pato Donald, con sus sobrinos, eran lo suficientemente inteligentes para volverse con el oro a Patolandia.

Claro. Ideológicamente. Eso no se sostiene.

Entonces, la investigación hegemónica en esa época en Europa, en Francia, la semiología pero sobre todo, en América latina, era ésa. Hay que estudiar el mensaje. Hay que estudiar el contenido, porque ahí está la ideología [00:22:00] dominante del capitalismo y del imperialismo.

En ese contexto, entra McLuhan. Se traduce McLuhan y que dice McLuhan: el medio es el mensaje. No importa lo que uno lee, lo que nos transforma es ver televisión, leer comics, escuchar la radio. Claro, iba contramano del mainstream de la investigación en comunicación. O sea, digamos que en América latina, la gente que sigue en esa línea que todavía existe y es fuerte, no es una visión muy crítica de todo esto, todavía hoy, a Marshal McLuhan le cae mal, pero lo mismo pasa en Europa y otros países donde la gente que busca una lectura crítica anti-capitalista y anti-sistémica de la comunicación, no la va a encontrar nunca en Marshall McLuhan, por más que sea de América latina, de de de Europa o de Asia.

Entonces yo no radicaría todo esto en un ámbito anglosajón y el latinoamericano.

Después, bueno, la hora de McLuhan es bastante [00:23:00] polisemica. Admite como cualquier autor así, que tiene un estilo incluso de escritura tan creativo en forma de mosaico.

No era un escritor Cartesiano ordenadito y formal. No, no. McLuhan era una explosión de ideas muy bien diseñada a propósito, pero era una explosión de ideas. Por eso siempre refrescan tener a McLuhan.

Entonces normal que surjan interpretaciones diferentes, no? En estados unidos en Canadá, en Inglaterra, en Europa continental o en Latinoamérica o en Japón, obviamente, no?

Siendo un autor que tiene estas características. Por eso yo no en no anclaría esto en cuestiones territoriales. Cuando uno busca un enfoque que no tenga esta carga ideológica para poder entender los medios, que no se limite sólo a denunciar el contenido.

McLuhan y la escuela de la ecología de los medios es fundamental y es un aporte muy, muy importante en ese sentido, no? Entonces, bueno, yo creo que McLuhan tuvo [00:24:00] detractores en Europa, tuvo detractores en América latina y cada tanto aparece alguno, pero yo creo que esto se ido suavizando. Yo quiero que, como que cada vez más se lo reivindica McLuhan.

La gente que estudia, por ejemplo, en Europa y en América latina, que quizá en su época criticaron a McLuhan, todas las teorías de la mediatización, por ejemplo, terminan coincidiendo en buena parte de los planteos de la media ecology. Hoy que se habla mucho de la materialidad de la comunicación, los nuevos materialismos, yo incluyo a Marshall McLuhan en uno de los pioneros des esta visión también de los nuevos materialismos. Al descentrar el análisis del contenido, al medio, a la cosa material, podemos considerar a macl también junto a Bruno Latour y otra gente como pionero, un poco de esta visión de no quedarse atrapados en el giro lingüístico, no, en el contenido, en el giro semiótico e incorporar también la dimensión material de la comunicación y el medio en sí.[00:25:00]

Chris: Muy bien. Muy bien, ya. Wow, es tanto, pero lo aprecio mucho. Gracias, Carlos. Y me gustaría seguir preguntándote un poco ahora de tu propio trabajo. Tienes un capítulo en tu libro. Las Leyes de la Interfaz titulado "Las Interfaces Co-evolucionan Con Sus Usuarios" donde escribes "estas leyes de la interfaz no desprecian a los artefactos, sus inventores ó las fuerzas sociales. Solo se limitan á insertarlos á una red socio técnica de relaciones, intercambios y transformaciones para poder analizarlos desde una perspectiva eco-evolutiva."

Ahora, hay un montón ahí en este paragrafito. Pero entonces, me gustaría preguntarte, cómo vea los humanos [00:26:00] co-evolucionando con sus tecnologías? Por ejemplo, nuestra forma de performatividad en la pantalla se convierte en un hábito más allá de la pantalla.

Carlos: Ya desde antes del homo sapiens, los homínidos más avanzados, digamos en su momento, creaban instrumentos de piedra. Hemos descubierto todos los neandertales tenían una cultura muy sofisticada, incluso prácticas casi y religiosas, más allá de la cuestión material de la construcción de artefactos. O sea que nuestra especie es impensable sin la tecnología, ya sea un hacha de piedra o ya sea tiktok o un smartphone.

Entonces, esto tenemos que tenerlo en cuenta cuando analizamos cualquier tipo de de interacción cotidiana, estamos rodeados de tecnología y acá, obviamente, la idea McLuhaniana es fundamental. Nosotros creamos estos medios. Nosotros creamos estas tecnologías.

Estas tecnologías también nos reformatean. [00:27:00] McLuhan, no me suena que haya usado el concepto de coevolución, pero está ahí. Está hablando de eso.

Ahora bien. Hay una coevolución si se quiere a larguísimo plazo, que, por ejemplo, sabemos que el desarrollo de instrumentos de piedra, el desarrollo del fuego, hizo que el homo sapiens no necesitara una mandíbula tan grande para poder masticar los alimentos. Y eso produce todo un cambio, que achicó la mandíbula le dejó más espacio en el cerebro, etcétera, etcétera. Eso es una coevolución en término genético, digamos a larguísimo plazo, okey.

También la posición eréctil, etcétera, etcétera. Pero, digamos que ya ahí había tecnologías humanas coevolucionando con estos cambios genéticos muy, muy lentos.

Pero ahora tenemos también podemos decir esta co evolución ya a nivel de la estructura neuronal, entonces lo ha verificado la neurociencia, como dije antes. Hay cambio físico en la estructura del cerebro a lo largo de la vida de una persona debido a la interacción con ciertas tecnologías. Y por qué pasa eso?

Porque [00:28:00] la producción, creación de nuevos medios, nuevas tecnologías se ido acelerando cada vez más. Ahi podemos hacer una curva exponencial hacia arriba, para algunos esto empezó hace 10,000 años. Para algunos esto se aceleró con la revolución industrial. Algunos hablan de la época el descubrimiento de América.

Bueno, para alguno esto es un fenómeno de siglo xx. El hecho es que en términos casi geológicos, esto que hablamos del antropoceno es real y está vinculado al impacto del ser humano sobre nuestro ambiente y lo tecnológico es parte de ese proceso exponencial de co evolución.

Nosotros hoy sentimos un agobio frente a esta aceleración de la tecnología y nuestra necesidad. Quizá de adaptarnos y coevolucionar con ella. Como esto de que todo va muy rápido. Cada semana hay un problema nuevo, una aplicación nueva. Ahora tenemos la inteligencia artificial, etc, etcétera.

Pero esta sensación [00:29:00] no es nueva. Es una sensación de la modernidad. Si uno lee cosas escritas en 1,800 cuando llega el tren también la gente se quejaba que el mundo iba muy rápido. Dónde iremos a parar con este caballo de hierro que larga humo no? O sea que esta sensación de velocidad de cambio rápido ya generaciones anteriores la vivían. Pero evidentemente, el cambio hoy es mucho más rápido y denso que hace dos siglos. Y eso es real también.

Así que, bueno, nuestra fe se va coevolucionando y nos vamos adaptando como podemos, yo esta pregunta se la hice hace 10 años a Kevin Kelly, el primer director de la revista Wire que lo trajimos a Barcelona y el que siempre es muy optimista. Kevin Kelly es determinista tecnológico y optimista al mismo tiempo.

Él decía que "que bueno que el homo sapiens lo va llevando bastante bien. Esto de co evolucionar con la tecnología." Otra gente tiene una [00:30:00] visión radicalmente opuesta, que esto es el fin del mundo, que el homo sapiens estamos condenados a desaparecer por esta co evolución acelerada, que las nuevas generaciones son cada vez más estúpidas.

Yo no creo eso. Creo, como McLuhan, que los medios nos reforman, nos cambian algunas cosas quizás para vivir otras quizá no tanto, pero no, no tengo una visión apocalíptica de esto para nada.

Chris: Bien, bien. Entonces cuando mencionaste lo de la televisión, yo me acuerdo mucho de de mi niñez y no sé por qué. Quizás fue algo normal en ese tiempo para ver a tele como un monstruo, como dijiste o quizás porque mis mis papás eran migrantes pero fue mucho de su idea de esa tecnología y siempre me dijo como no, no, no quédate ahí tan cerca y eso.

Entonces, aunque lo aceptaron, ellos comprendieron que el poder [00:31:00] de la tele que tenía sobre las personas. Entonces ahora todos, parece a mí, que todos tienen su propio canal, no su propio programación, o el derecho o privilegio de tener su propio canal o múltiples canales.

Entonces, es una gran pregunta, pero cuáles crees que son las principales consecuencias de darle a cada uno su propio programa en el sentido de como es el efecto de hacer eso, de democratizar quizás la tecnología en ese sentido?

Carlos: Cuando dices su propio canal, te refieres a la posibilidad de emitir o construir tu propia dieta mediática.

Chris: Bueno primero, pero puede ser ambos, claro, no? O sea, mi capacidad de tener un perfil o cuenta mía personal. Y luego como el fin del turismo, no? Y luego otro.

Carlos: Sí, a ver. Yo creo que, bueno, esto fue el gran cambio radical que empezó a darse a partir la década del 2000 o [00:32:00] sea, hace 25 años. Porque la web al principio sí era una red mundial en los años 90. Pero claro la posibilidad de compartir un contenido y que todo el mundo lo pudiera ver, estaba muy limitado a crear una página web, etcétera. Cuando aparecen las redes sociales o las Web 2.0 como se la llamaba en esa época y eso se suma los dispositivos móviles, ahí se empieza a generar esta cultura tan difundida de la creación de contenido.

Hasta digamos que hasta ese momento quien generaba contenido era más o menos un profesional en la radio y en la televisión, pero incluso en la web o en la prensa o el cine. Y a partir de ahí se empieza, digamos, a abrir el juego.

En su momento, esto fue muy bien saludado fue qué bueno! Esto va nos va a llevar a una sociedad más democrática. 25 años después, claro, estamos viendo el lado oscuro solamente. Yo creo que el error hace 25 años era pensar solo las posibilidades [00:33:00] buenas, optimistas, de esto. Y hoy me parece que estamos enredados en discursos solamente apocalípticos no?

No vemos las cosas buenas, vemos solo las cosas malas. Yo creo que hay de las dos cosas hoy. Claro, hoy cualquier persona puede tener un canal, sí, pero no todo el mundo crea un canal. Los niveles de participación son muy extraños, o sea, la mayor parte de la población de los usuarios y usuarias entre en las redes. Mira. Mete un me gusta. Quizá un comentario. Cada tanto comparte una foto.

Digamos que los "heavy users" o "heavy producers" de contenido son siempre una minoría, ya sea profesionales, ya sea influencers, streamers, no? Es siempre, yo no sé si acá estamos en un 20-80 o un 10-90 son estas curvas que siempre fue así? No?

Si uno ve la Wikipedia, habrá un 5-10 por ciento de gente que genera contenido mucho menos incluso. Y un 90 por ciento que se [00:34:00] beneficia del trabajo de una minoría. Esto invierte la lógica capitalista? La mayoría vive de la minoría y esto pasaba antes también en otros, en otros sistemas. O sea que en ese sentido, es sólo una minoría de gente la que genera contenido de impacto, llamémoslo así, de alcance mayor.

Pero bueno, yo creo que el hecho de que cualquier persona pueda dar ese salto para mí, está bien. Genera otra serie de problemas, no? Porque mientras que genera contenido, es un profesional o un periodista, digamos, todavía queda algo de normas éticas y que deben cumplir no? Yo veo que en el mundo de los streamers, el mundo de los Tik tokers etcétera, etcétera, lo primero que ellos dicen es, nosotros no somos periodistas.

Y de esa forma, se inhiben de cualquier, control ético o de respeto a normas éticas profesionales. Por otro lado, las plataformas [00:35:00] Meta, Google, todas. Lo primero que te dicen es nosotros no somos medio de comunicación. Los contenidos los pone la gente.

Nosotros no tenemos nada que ver con eso. Claro, ellos también ahí se alejan de toda la reglamentación. Por eso hubo que hacer. Europa y Estados Unidos tuvo que sacar leyes especiales porque ellos decían no, no, las leyes del periodismo a nosotros no nos alcanzan. Nosotros no somos editores de contenidos.

Y es una mentira porque las plataformas sí editan contenido a través los algoritmos, porque nos están los algoritmos, nos están diciendo que podemos ver y que no está en primera página. No están filtrando información, o sea que están haciendo edición. Entonces, como que se generan estas equivocaciones.

Y eso es uno de los elementos que lleva esta contaminación que mencioné antes en el en los ámbitos de la comunicación. Pero yo, si tuviera que elegir un ecosistema con pocos enunciadores pocos medios controlados por profesionales y este ecosistema [00:36:00] caótico en parte contaminado con muchos actores y muchas voces, yo prefiero el caos de hoy a la pobreza del sistema anterior.

Prefiero lidiar, pelearme con y estar buscar de resolver el problema de tener mucha información, al problema de la censura y tener sólo dos, tres puntos donde se genera información. Yo he vivido en Argentina con dictadura militar con control férreo de medios, coroneles de interventores en la radio y la televisión que controlaban todo lo que se decía.

Y yo prefiero el caos de hoy, aún con fake news y todo lo que quieras. Prefiero el caos de hoy a esa situación.

Chris: Sí, sí, sí, sí. Es muy fuerte de pensar en eso para la gente que no han vivido en algo así, no? Osea algunos familiares extendidos han vivido en mundos comunistas, en el pasado en el este de Europa y no se hablan [00:37:00] exactamente así.

Pero, se se hablan, no? Y se se dicen que lo que lo que no tenía ni lo que no tiene por control y por fuerza. Entonces, en ese como mismo sentido de lo que falta de la memoria vivida, me gustaría preguntarte sobre tu nuevo libro. Y sobre la evolución de medios. Entonces me gustaría preguntarte igual por nuestros oyentes que quizás no han estudiado mucho de la ecología de los medios

Para ti qué es la evolución de los medios y por qué es importante para nuestro cambiante y comprensión del mundo. O sea, igual al lado y no solo pegado a la ecología de medios, pero la evolución de los medios,

Carlos: Sí, te cuento ahí hay una disciplina, ya tradicional que es la historia y también está la historia de la comunicación y historia de los medios. [00:38:00] Hay libros muy interesantes que se titulan Historia de la Comunicación de Gutenberg a Internet o Historia de la Comunicación del Papiro a Tiktok.

Entonces, qué pasa? Esos libros te dicen bueno, estaba el papiro, después vino el pergamino, el manuscrito, después en 1450 vino Gutenberg, llegó el libro. Pero eso el libro no te cuentan que pasó con el manuscrito, ni que pasó con el papiro. Y te dicen que llega la radio en 1920 y en 1950 llega la televisión y no te dicen que pasó con la radio, que pasó con el cine.

Son historias lineales donde un medio parece que va sustituyendo al otro. Y después tenemos muchos libros muy buenos también. Historia de la radio, historia de la televisión, historia de internet, historia del periodismo. Como dije antes, retomando una idea, de McLuhan no podemos entender los medios aislados.

Yo no puedo entender la evolución de la radio si no la vinculo a la prensa, a [00:39:00] la televisión y otro al podcast. Okey, entonces digo, necesitamos un campo de investigación, llamémoslo una disciplina en construcción, que es una teoría y también es metodología para poder entender el cambio mediático, todas estas transformaciones del ecosistema de medios a largo plazo y que no sea una sucesión de medios, sino, ver cómo esa red de medios fue evolucionando. Y eso yo lo llamo una teoría evolutiva o una "media evolution"

Y es lo que estoy trabajando ahora. Claro, esta teoría, este enfoque, este campo de investigación toma muchas cosas de la ecología de los medios, empezando por Marshall McLuhan pero también gente de la tradición previa a la media ecology como Harold Innis, el gran historiador, economista de la comunicación y de la sociedad, que fue quizás el intelectual más famoso en Canadá en la primera mitad del siglo XX. Harold Innis que influenció mucho a Marshall McLuhan [00:40:00]

Marshall McLuhann en la primera página de Gutenberg Galaxy, dice este libro no es otra cosa que una nota al pie de página de la obra de Harold Innis Entonces, Harold Innis que hizo una historia de los tiempos antiguos poniendo los medios al centro de esa historia. Para mí es fundamental. Incluso te diría a veces más que McLuhan, como referencia, a la hora de hacer una teoría evolutiva del cambio mediático. Y después, obviamente tomo muchas cosas de la historia de los medios.

Tomo muchas cosas de la arqueología de los medios (media archeology). Tomo cosas también de la gente que investigó la historia de la tecnología, la construcción social de la tecnología. O sea, la media evolution es un campo intertextual, como cualquier disciplina que toma cosas de todos estos campos para poder construir una teoría, un enfoque, una mirada que sea más a largo plazo, que no sea una sucesión de medios, sino que vea la evolución de todo el ecosistema mediático, prestando mucha atención a las relaciones [00:41:00] entre medios, y con esta visión más compleja sistémica de cómo cambian las cosas.

Yo creo que el cambio mediático es muy rápido y necesitamos una teoría para poder darle un sentido a todo este gran cambio, porque si nos quedamos analizando cosas muy micro, muy chiquititas, no vemos los grandes cambios. No nos podemos posicionar... esto un poco como el fútbol. Los mejores jugadores son los que tienen el partido en la cabeza y saben dónde está todo. No están mirando la pelota, pero saben dónde están los otros jugadores?

Bueno, yo creo que la media evolution sirve para eso. Más allá de que hoy estemos todos hablando de la IA generativa. No? Tener esta visión de de conjunto de todo el ecosistema mediático y tecnológico, yo creo que es muy útil.

Chris: Mm. Wow Increíble, increíble. Sí. Sí. Pienso mucho en como las nuevas generaciones o las generaciones más jóvenes en el día de hoy. O sea, [00:42:00] al menos más joven que yo, que la mayoría, como que tiene 20 años hoy, no tienen una memoria vívida de cómo fuera el mundo, sin redes sociales o sin el internet. Y así como me voy pensando en mi vida y como yo, no tengo una memoria de vida como fuera el mundo sin pantallas de cualquier tipo, o sea de tele de compus. No solo de internet o redes.

Carlos: Sí, no, te decia que mi padre vivió, mi padre tiene 90 años y él se recuerda en el año 58, 59, su casa fue la primera en un barrio de Rosario que tuvo televisión y transmitían a partir de la tarde seis, siete de la tarde. Entonces venían todos los vecinos y vecinas a ver televisión a la casa de mi abuela. Entonces cada uno, cada generación tiene sus historias. No?

Chris: Ajá. Ajá. Sí. Pues sí. Y también, como dijiste, para [00:43:00] entender los medios como sujetos o objetos individuales, o sea en su propio mundo, no? Este recuerdo un poco de la metáfora de Robin Wall Kimmerer que escribió un libro que se llama Braiding Sweetgrass o Trenzando Pasto Dulce supongo, en español. Y mencionó que para entender el entendimiento indígena, digamos entre comillas de tiempo, no necesitamos pensar en una línea, una flecha desde el pasado hacia el futuro. Pero, un lago, mientras el pasado, presente, y futuro existen, a la vez, en ese lago.

Y también pienso como en el lugar, el pasado, presente, y el futuro, como todos esos medios existiendo a la vez, como en un lago y obviamente en una ecología de su evolución de sus cambios.

Carlos: Es, muy interesante eso. Después te voy a pedir la referencia del libro porque, claro, [00:44:00] McLuhan siempre decía que el contenido de un medio es otro medio. Entonces, puede pasar que un medio del pasado deja su huella o influye en un medio del futuro. Y entonces ahí se rompe la línea temporal. Y esos son los fenómenos que a mí me interesa estudiar.

Chris: Mmm, mmm, pues Carlos para terminar, tengo dos últimas preguntas para ti. Esta vez un poco alineado con el turismo, y aunque no estas enfocado tanto en en el estudio de turismo. Por mis estudios y investigaciones y por este podcast, he amplificado esa definición de turismo para ver cómo existiría más allá de una industria. Y para mí, el turismo incluye también el deseo de ver una persona, un lugar o una cultura como destino, como algo útil, temporal en su valor de uso y por tanto, desechable. Entonces, me gustaría [00:45:00] preguntarte, si para ti parece que nuestros medios populares, aunque esto es un tiempo, digamos con más libertad de otros lugares o tiempos en el pasado, más autoritarianos o totalitarianos? Si te ves la posibilidad o la evidencia de que nuestros medios digamos como mainstream más usados, están creando o promoviendo un , un sentido de alienación en la gente por efectivamente quedarles a distancia al otro o la otra.

Carlos: Yo ya te dije no, no tengo una visión apocalíptica de los medios. Nunca, la tuve. Esto no quita de que los medios y como dijimos antes, tienen problemas. Generan también contaminación. Llamémoslo así si seguimos con la metáfora, ? El tema de alienación viene desde hace [00:46:00] muchísimos años. Ya cuando estudiaba en la universidad, nunca sintonicé con las teorías de la alienación.

El concepto de alienación viene del siglo XIX. Toda una teoría de la conciencia, el sujeto, el proletario, llamémoslo, así que tenía que tomar conciencia de clase. Bueno, las raíces de esa visión del concepto alienación vienen de ahí. Yo, a mí nunca me convenció, justamente. Y acá si interesante.

El aporte de América Latina en teorías de la comunicación siempre fue diferente. Fue reivindicar la resignificación, la resemantización el rol activo del receptor, cuando muchas veces las teorías que venían de Europa o Estados Unidos tenían esta visión del receptor de la comunicación como un ser pasivo.

En ese sentido, la media ecology nunca entró en ese discurso porque se manejaba con otros parámetros, pero digamos que lo que era el mainstream de la investigación de estados unidos, pero también de Europa, siempre coincidían en esto en considerar el receptor pasivo, alienado, [00:47:00] estupidizado por los medios. Y yo realmente nunca, me convenció ese planteo, ni antes ni hoy, ni con la televisión de los 70 y 80, ni con el tiktok de hoy.

Esto no quita que puede haber gente que tenga alguna adicción, etcétera, etcétera. Pero yo no creo que toda la sociedad sea adicta hoy a la pantallita. Deja de ser adicción. Okey. Esto no implica que haya que no tener una visión crítica. Esto no implica que haya que eventualmente regular los usos de ciertas tecnologías, obviamente.

Pero de ahí a pensar que estamos en un escenario apocalíptico, de idiotización total del homo sapiens o de alienación. Yo no lo veo, ni creo que lo los estudios empíricos confirmen eso. Más allá que a veces hay elecciones y no nos gusten los resultados.

Pero ahí es interesante, porque cuando tu propio partido político pierde, siempre se le echa la culpa a los medios porque ganó el otro. Pero cuando tu partido político gana, nadie dice nada de los medios. Ganamos porque somos mejores, [00:48:00] porque tenemos mejores ideas, porque somos más democráticos, porque somos más bonitos.

Entonces, claro te das cuenta que se usan los medios como chivo expiatorio para no reconocer las propias debilidades políticas a la hora de denunciar una propuesta o de seducir al electorado.

Chris: Claro, claro. Ya pues estos temas son vastos y complejos. Y por eso me gusta, y por eso estoy muy agradecido por pasar este tiempo contigo, Carlos.

Pero los temas requieren un profundo disciplina para comprender, o al menos según yo, como alguien que está muy nuevo a estos temas. Entonces, a nuestra época, parece que somos, según yo, arrastrados a una velocidad sin precedentes. Nuestras tecnologías están avanzando y quizás socavando simultáneamente nuestra capacidad de comprender lo que está sucediendo en el mundo. Los usamos como protesta a veces como, como mencionaste, [00:49:00] pero sin una comprensión más profunda de cómo nos usan también.

Entonces tengo la curiosidad por saber qué papel desempeña la ecología de los medios en la redención o curación de la cultura en nuestro tiempo. Cómo podría la ecología de los medios ser un aliado, quizás, en nuestros caminos?

Carlos: Sí, yo creo que esta idea estaba presente, no? En los teóricos de la media ecology, digamos la primera generación.

Ahora que lo pienso, estaba también en la semiótica de Umberto Eco, no? Cuando decía la semiótica más allá de analizar cómo se construye significado, también aporta a mejorar la vida significativa, o sea, la vida cultural, la vida comunicacional, nuestro funcionamiento como sujeto, digamos. Y yo creo que en ese sentido, la media ecology también.

Digamos, si nosotros entendemos el ecosistema mediático, vamos a poder sacarlo mejor [00:50:00] coevolucionar mejor. Vamos a ser más responsables también a la hora de generar contenidos, a la hora de retwittear de manera a veces automática ciertas cosas. Yo creo que es todo un crecimiento de vivir una vida mediática sana, que yo creo que hoy existe esa posibilidad.

Yo estoy en Twitter desde el 2008-2009 y sólo dos veces tuve así un encontronazo y bloqueé a una persona mal educada. Después el resto de mi vida en Twitter, es rica de información de contactos. Aprendo muchísimo me entero de cosas que se están investigando. O sea, también están uno elegir otras cosas.

Y por ejemplo, donde veo que yo hay que hay redes que no me aportan nada, no directamente ni entro. También es eso de aprender a sacar lo mejor de este ecosistema mediático. Y lo mismo para el ecosistema natural. Así como estamos aprendiendo a preocuparnos de dónde viene la comida, [00:51:00] cuánto tiempo se va a tardar en disolver este teléfono móvil por los componentes que tiene. Bueno, también es tomar conciencia de eso. Ya sea en el mundo natural, como en el mundo de la comunicación. Y yo creo que todos estos conocimientos, en este caso, la media ecology nos sirve para captar eso, no? Y mejorar nosotros también como sujetos, que ya no somos más el centro del universo, que esta es la otra cuestión. Somos un átomo más perdido entre una complejidad muy grande.

Chris: Mm. Mm, pues que estas obras y trabajos y estudios tuyos y de los demás nos da la capacidad de leer y comprender ese complejidad, no?

O sea, parece más y más complejo cada vez y nos requiere como más y más discernimiento. Entonces, yo creo que pues igual, hemos metido mucho en tu voluntad y capacidad de [00:52:00] hacer eso y ponerlo en el mundo. Entonces, finalmente Carlos me gustaría a extender mi agradecimiento y la de nuestros oyentes por tu tiempo hoy, tu consideración y tu trabajo.

Siento que pues, la alfabetización mediática y la ecología de los medios son extremadamente deficientes en nuestro tiempo y su voluntad de preguntar sobre estas cosas y escribir sobre ellas es una medicina para un mundo quebrantado y para mi turístico. Entonces, así que muchísimas gracias, Carlos, por venir hoy.

Carlos: Gracias. Te agradezco por las preguntas. Y bueno, yo creo que el tema del turismo es un tema que está ocupa lugar central hoy. Si tú estuvieras en Barcelona, verías que todos los días se está debatiendo este tema. Así que yo creo que bueno, adelante con esa reflexión y esa investigación sobre el turismo, porque es muy pertinente y necesaria.

Chris: Pues sí, gracias. [00:53:00] Igual yo siento que hay una conexión fuerte entre esas definiciones más amplias de turismo y la ecología de medios. O sea, ha abierto una apertura muy grande para mí para entender el turismo más profundamente. Igual antes de terminar Carlos, cómo podrían nuestros oyentes encontrar tus libros y tu trabajo?

Sé que hemos hablado de dos libros que escribiste, pero hay mucho más. Muchísimo más. Entonces, cómo se pueden encontrarlos y encontrarte?

Carlos: Lo más rápido es en en mi blog, que es hipermediaciones.com

Ahí van a encontrar información sobre todos los libros que voy publicando, etcétera, etc. Y después, bueno, yo soy muy activo, como dije en Twitter X. Me encuentran la letra CEscolari y de Carlos es mi Twitter. Y bueno, también ahí trato de difundir información sobre estos [00:54:00] temas.

Como dije antes, aprendo mucho de esa red y trato de también devolver lo que me dan poniendo siempre información pertinente. Buenos enlaces. Y no pelearme mucho.

Chris: Muy bien, muy bien, pues voy a asegurar que esos enlaces y esas páginas estén ya en la sección de tarea el sitio web de El fin del turismo cuando sale el episodio.

Igual otras entrevistas y de tus libros. No hay falta. Entonces, con mucho gusto, los voy compartiendo. Bueno, Carlos, muchísimas gracias y lo aprecio mucho.

Carlos: Muchas gracias y nos vemos en México.

Leave a comment

Subscribe now

English Transcription

Chris: [00:00:00] Welcome to the podcast The End of Tourism, Carlos. Thank you for being able to speak with me today. It's a great pleasure to have you here with me today.

Carlos: No, thank you, Chris, for the invitation. It is a great pleasure and honor to chat with you, a great traveler and, well, I have never directly investigated the subject of tourism.

Well, I understand that we are going to talk about media ecology and collateral issues that can help us better understand, give meaning to all that is happening in the world of tourism. Well, I work in Barcelona. I don't live in the city exactly, but I work at the university in Barcelona, in the central area.

Well, every time I go to the city, the number of tourists increases every day and the debate on tourism in all its dimensions increases. So it is a topic that is on the agenda, right?

Chris: Yes, well I imagine that even if you don't like to think or if you don't want to think about tourism there, it is inevitable to have a personal lesson [00:01:00] from that industry.

Carlos: Yes, to the point that it is almost becoming a taxonomic criterion, right? ...of classification or cities with a lot of tourists, cities or places without tourists that are the most sought after until they are filled with tourists. So we are practically in a vicious circle.

Chris: Well, at some point I know that it changes, the cycle breaks, at least to account for what we are doing with the behavior.

And I understand that this also has a lot to do with the ecology of the media, the lack of ability to understand our behaviors, attitudes, thoughts, feelings, etc. So, before continuing with your work and deeds, I would like to ask you about your path and your life.

First, I wonder if you could define for our listeners what media ecology is and how you [00:02:00] became interested in this field? How did you come to dedicate your life to this study?

Carlos: Yes. Let's see a little bit. There is one, this is the official history. We would say media ecology, it is a field of research, let's say, that was born in the 60s. We must take into account above all the work of Marshall McLuhan, a Canadian researcher who is very famous worldwide. He was perhaps the most famous media researcher philosopher in the 60s and 70s.

And a colleague of his, Neil Postman, who was at New York University, was a bit, let's say, among the people who surrounded these two references, no, in the 60s, from there it was brewing, let's say, what was later called media ecology. It is said that the first person to talk about media ecology, who applied this metaphor to the media, was Marshall McLuhan himself in some private conversations, [00:03:00] letters that were sent to each other in the late 50s, early 60s, by researchers on these topics?

Let's say the first public appearance of the concept of media ecology was a lecture in 1968 by Neil Postman. It was a public speech that talked about how the media transforms us and how the media transforms us, forming an environment in which we grow, develop, and so on. And we are sometimes not very aware of this environment that surrounds us and shapes us.

He first used the concept of media ecology in a public lecture. And then, if we go back to the early 70s, Postman himself created the first program in media ecology at NYU, at New York University. So, in 73, 74 and 75, what I call the second generation began to emerge, of people [00:04:00] some of whom were trained in these courses in New York.

For example, Christine Nystrom was the first PhD thesis on my ecology; people like Paul Levinson who in 1979 defended a PhD thesis directed by Postman on the evolution of the media, right? And the same thing happened in Toronto in the 70s. Marshall McLuhan died in December 80.

Let's say that the 70s were his last decade of intellectual production. And there are a number of collaborators at that time, very young people like Robert Logan, Derrick De Kerchove, who later continued to work a bit along these lines, along these lines. And there we talk about the Canadian front, eh?

This whole second generation was developing, expanding and applying. Let's not forget Eric McLuhan, Marshall's son, who was also part of this whole movement. [00:05:00] And if I remember correctly, in 2000, the Media Ecology Association was created, which is the Media Ecology Association, which is an academic, scientific organization that brings together people who deal with media ecology.

If we think at a more scientific epistemological level, we can think of this metaphor of media ecology from two or three perspectives. On the one hand, this idea that media create environments. This is a very strong idea of Marsha McLuhan, of Postman and of this whole group, isn't it? The media - "medium" understood in a very broad sense, no, any technology could be a medium for them.

For Marsha McLuhan, the wheel is a medium. A telescope is a medium. A radio is a medium and television is a medium, right? I mean, any technology can be considered a medium. Let's say that these media, these technologies, generate a [00:06:00] environment that transforms us. It transforms our way, sometimes our way of thinking, our way of perceiving the world, our conception of time and space.

And we are not aware of that change. Let's think that, I don't know, before 1800, if someone had to make a trip of a thousand kilometers (and here we are approaching tourism) kilometers was a trip that had to be planned many months in advance. With the arrival of the train, we are already in 1800, those kilometers were shortened. Let's say no? There we see as if today they tell us 1000 kilometers.

Well, yes, we take a plane. It's an hour, an hour and a quarter of a journey. Today, 1000 kilometres is much less than 200 years ago and even in terms of time, time has changed. Right? All of that is a consequence, let's say, of this change, our perception is a consequence of a series of media and technologies.

The railroad. Obviously, today we have airplanes. The same digital networks that have somewhat brought us this idea of "time [00:07:00] real," this anxiety of wanting everything fast, right? That is also a consequence of these environmental changes generated by the media and technologies, eh? This is a very strong idea, when McLuhan and Postman talked about this in the 60s, they were strong intuitions that they had from a very intelligent observation of reality. Today, cognitive sciences, or rather neuroscience, have confirmed these hypotheses. In other words, today there are a series of methodologies to study the brain and we can already see how technologies...

The media even affects the physical structure of the brain. Right? Another thing that is historical is that the media affects our memory. This comes from Plato 2,500 years ago, who said that writing would kill the memory of men. Well, we can think for ourselves, right?

Or at least this generation, who [00:08:00] lived in a world before and after mobile apps. 30 years ago, 25 years ago, I had 30-40 phone numbers in my memory. Today I don't have any. And let's also think about GPS, right? At one time, taxi drivers in London, which is a Latin city, knew the city by heart. And today, that's no longer necessary because they have GPS.

And when they went to study the brains of London taxi drivers, they saw that certain areas of the brain had shrunk, so to speak, which are the areas that manage the spatial part. McLuhan already talked about this in the 60s. He said that changes narcotize certain areas of the mind, he said.

But well, we see that a lot of empirical research, very cutting-edge neuroscience research is confirming all these thoughts, all these things that were said in the 60s onwards, by media ecology. Another possibility is to understand [00:09:00] this as a media ecosystem, Marshall McLuhan always said we cannot give it meaning,

We cannot understand a medium in isolation from other media. It is as if media only acquire meaning in relation to other media. Neil Postman and many other people from the school of media ecology also defend this position, that, well, we cannot understand the history of cinema if we do not link it to video games, if we do not link it to the appearance of television.

And so with all the media, right? Eh? There are some very interesting works. For example, about how in the 19th century, different media, we could say, co-evolved with each other. The press, the telegraph. The train, which also transported newspapers, news agencies appeared. I mean, we see how it is very difficult to understand the development of the press in the 19th century and we don't link it to the telephone, if we don't link it to photography, if we don't link it to radio photography, [00:10:00] also later on.

I mean, this idea is very strong. It is also one of the principles that I consider fundamental to this vision, which would be that the media are not alone, they are part of an ecosystem and if we want to understand what is happening and how all this works, we cannot, uh, analyze the media in isolation from the rest.

There is a third interpretation. I don't know if it's too metaphorical, right? Above all, people in Italy like the researcher Fausto Colombo from Milan or Michele Cometa, he is a researcher from Sicily, Michele Cometa who talks about the turn, the ecomedia turn. These researchers are moving in a whole conception according to which, we are in a unique media ecosystem that is contaminated.

It is contaminated by "fake news" it is contaminated by false news, it is contaminated by hate speech, etc., etc. So they, let's say, take up this ecological metaphor to say [00:11:00] We have to clean this ecosystem just as the natural ecosystem is contaminated, it needs a cleaning intervention, let's say a purification, eh?

The media ecosystem is also in the same danger, isn't it? And these people are also calling attention, and I am very close to this line of work on the material dimension of communication. And this also has to do with tourism, right? The environmental impact that communication has today.

Training an artificial intelligence involves a huge amount of electricity; keeping social networks running, eh, TikTok, YouTube, whatever, involves millions of servers running that suck up electricity and also have to be cooled, consuming even more electricity. And that has a significant impact on the climate.

So, well, let's say, we see that this metaphor of the ecological, applied to the media, gives rise to two or three interpretations.

Chris: Mmm. [00:12:00] Wow. I feel like when I started taking that course from Andrew McLuhan, Marshall's grandson, as I mentioned, it changed my perspective completely - on the world, on the way I understand and how I don't understand our technologies, my movements, etc. But now, from a person who has been studying this for decades, I would like to know how you started. I mean, Andrew, for example, has the excuse of his lineage, not his father and his grandfather.

But then, as a young Argentine, he began learning about media ecology.

Carlos: Well, I'll tell you. I studied communication in Argentina, in Rosario. I finished college. The last exam was on June 24, 1986, which was the day that Lionel Messi was born in Rosario, Argentina, on the same day. And [00:13:00] I worked, I collaborated in a class in a subject that was communication theories.

And I even taught until 1990, three years, because after that I went to live in Italy. At that time, we read Marshall McLuhan, but it was a very ideologically biased reading. In Latin America, you must have seen it in Mexico. There is a whole history, a tradition of criticism from the media, especially of everything that comes from the United States, and Canada is very close to the United States.

So, let's say that in the 70s and 80s and until today I would tell you that Marshall McLuhan was often criticized because he did not criticize the media. I mean, he had a vision. He said, Neil Postman, yes, he had a very critical vision. But in that case, this was one of the big differences between Postman and McLuhan, that Marshall McLuhan, at least in [00:14:00] public, he did not criticize the media. He said, well, I am a researcher, I send out probes. I am exploring what is happening.

And he never joined in... And I think that was very clever of him... he never joined in this worldwide chorus of criticism of the media. At that time, television was a monster for many people.

Children were not supposed to watch television. A bit like what happens today with cell phones and what happens today with TikTok. At that time, television was the monster. At that time, there was a lot of research in the United States, which was already based on the premise that television and the media are bad for people.

We see that it is a story that repeats itself. I think that in that sense, Marshall McLuhan, very intelligently, did not join that critical chorus and he really dedicated himself to thinking about the media from a much freer perspective, not anchored by this vision that I believe is too ideologized, which is very strong in Latin America. It is very strong. This does not imply [00:15:00] letting down one's guard, not being critical. On the contrary.

But I think that true critical thinking starts from not saying so much ideology, we say "this is already bad. Let's look at this." There will be good things. There will be bad things. There will be things, which is undeniable, that the media, even if we say they are good, will transform us. And I think that was the important thing about the McLuhanian idea.

So my first approach to McLuhan was from the perspective of critical authors who, well, yes, come from the United States, they don't criticize the media. We're going to criticize him, right? And that was my first approach to Marshall McLuhan.

I went to Italy in the 90s. I was out of college for almost eight years, working in digital media, web development, multimedia products, and pretext. And in the late 90s, I said, I want to go back to college. I want to be a PhD. And I said, "I want to do a PhD. Well. Being in Italy, the PhD was going to be in semiotics." So I did a [00:16:00] PhD. My thesis was on semiotics of interfaces.

There I had a vision of digital interfaces that consider, for example, instruments like the mouse or joystick as extensions of our body, right? The mouse extends the hand and puts it inside the screen, right? Or the joystick or any other element of the digital interface? Of course. If we talk about the mouse being an extension of the hand, that is a McLuhanian idea.

The media as extensions of the human being as a subject. So, of course, I reread McLuhan in Italian at the end of the 90s, and I reconciled with McLuhan because I found many interesting things to understand precisely the interaction with digital machines.

In 2002, I moved with my family to Spain. I returned to university life. [00:17:00] And there I began to study the relationship between old and new media. Then I recovered the idea of ecosystem. I recovered the whole new idea, the idea of ecology of my ecology. And I began to research and reread McLuhan for the third time.

And to read him and the entire school of my ecology in depth in order to understand the dynamics of the current media ecosystem and understand the emergence of the new and how the old struggles to adapt.

In 2009, I spent three months working with Bob Logan at the University of Toronto. Last year, I was at the conference there and we had two pre-conferences with people like Paolo Granata and the whole Toronto group.

So, I have a very strong relationship with everything that was and is produced in Toronto. And well, I think that, today, media ecology, along with other disciplines such as semiotics, is very useful to me in order to understand the current media ecosystem [00:18:00] and the main topic of my research today, which is the evolution of the media ecosystem.

Mm, let's say that within media ecology, starting with that 1979 doctoral thesis by Paul Levinson, there is a whole series of contributions, which are somewhat what have been leading to my latest book that came out last year in English from Routledge, called The Evolution of Media and has just come out in Spanish.

What is called Media Evolution? In the evolutionary theory of media, there is a lot of media ecology involved.

Chris: Sure, sure. Well, happiness is Carlos. And we're going to come back to this topic of media evolution in a little bit, because I think it's very important and obviously it's very important to you. It's been like something very important in your work. But before leaving that corner of thought, there was a question that Andrew McLuhan sent me for you, which you already answered a little bit, but it has to do with the differences in the [00:19:00] worlds of Anglophone and Hispanic media ecology. And you already mentioned a little bit about that, but since the times in the 80s and 90s, so I'd like to know if those differences continue between the intellectual worlds, in the Anglophone or Hispanic world.

And so, to extend your question a little, what do you think would be like a more important point or theme or aspect of what one of those worlds has to learn about the other in the meaning of what is missing, perhaps?

Carlos: If we focus on Marshall McLuhan's work, it is not that he was criticized only in Latin America.

Marshall McLuhan was not popular in Europe in the 60s and 70s. For exactly the same reason, because he did not criticize the capitalist media system. The European tradition, the tradition of the Frankfurt School, the school of an anti- capitalist vision that denounces the dominant ideology in the media.

That is what enters Latin America and bounces back there with great force. Perhaps the main figure who speaks from Latin America, who has spoken for a long time about Latin America, is Armand Mattelart. Matterlart is a communication theorist, a researcher from Belgium.

And we found him in the mid-60s, late 60s in Chile at a very particular moment in Chilean history where there was a lot of politicization and a lot of critical research, obviously with the with with with capitalism and with American imperialism.

Perhaps the classic work of that time is Mattelart and Dorfman's famous book, eh, eh? To Read Donald Duck, where they dismantle the entire capitalist, imperialist ideological structure that was in the comics of Donald Duck.

They say this was posted at [00:21:00] early 70s. It is perhaps the best-selling Latin American comic book to date, eh? They say there is ideology in children's literature. With Donald Duck, they are filling our children's heads with a very particular vision of the world.

If you read Donald Duck from that time, at least most of the Donald Duck story, that was, you had to go looking for treasure and where. They were places in Africa, Peru, Inca, in other words, they were third world countries. And there Donald Duck, with his nephews, were smart enough to return to Duckburg with the gold.

Of course. Ideologically. That doesn't hold up.

So, the hegemonic research at that time in Europe, in France, semiology, but above all, in Latin America, was that. You have to study the message. You have to study the content, because that's where the ideology is [00:22:00] dominant of capitalism and imperialism.

In this context, McLuhan comes in. McLuhan is translated and McLuhan says: the medium is the message. It doesn't matter what one reads, what transforms us is watching television, reading comics, listening to the radio. Of course, it went against the mainstream of communication research. That is, let's say that in Latin America, the people who follow this line that still exists and is strong, do not have a very critical view of all this. Even today, Marshall McLuhan doesn't like him, but the same thing happens in Europe and other countries where people who seek a critical anti-capitalist and anti-systemic reading of communication will never find it in Marshall McLuhan, even if they are from Latin America, Europe or Asia.

So I would not place all this in an Anglo-Saxon or Latin American context.

Then, well, McLuhan's time is quite [00:23:00] polysemic. He admits, like any author like him, that he has a writing style that is even so creative in the form of a mosaic.

He was not a neat and formal Cartesian writer. No, no. McLuhan was an explosion of ideas that was very well designed on purpose, but it was an explosion of ideas. That's why it's always refreshing to have McLuhan.

So it's normal that there are different interpretations, right? In the United States, in Canada, in England, in continental Europe, in Latin America or in Japan, obviously, right?

Being an author with these characteristics, I would not anchor this in territorial issues. When one looks for an approach that does not have this ideological burden in order to understand the media, that is not limited to just denouncing the content.

McLuhan and the school of media ecology is fundamental and is a very, very important contribution in that sense, right? So, well, I think that McLuhan had [00:24:00] detractors in Europe, he had detractors in Latin America and every now and then one appears, but I think that this has been softened. I want McLuhan to claim it more and more.

People who study, for example, in Europe and Latin America, who perhaps in their time criticized McLuhan, all the theories of mediatization, for example, end up coinciding in a good part of the approaches of media ecology. Today, when there is much talk about the materiality of communication, the new materialisms, I include Marshall McLuhan in one of the pioneers of this vision of the new materialisms as well. By decentering the analysis of the content, to the medium, to the material thing, we can consider McLuhan also, along with Bruno Latour and other people, as a pioneer, a bit of this vision of not getting caught up in the linguistic turn, no, in the content, in the semiotic turn and also incorporating the material dimension of communication and the medium itself. [00:25:00]

Chris: Okay. Okay, now. Wow, that's a lot, but I really appreciate it. Thanks, Carlos. And I'd like to ask you a little bit more about your own work now. You have a chapter in your book, The Laws of Interface, called "Interfaces Co-evolve With Their Users," where you write, "These interface laws don't disregard artifacts, their inventors, or social forces. They just insert them into a socio-technical network of relationships, exchanges, and transformations in order to analyze them from an eco-evolutionary perspective."

Now, there's a lot there in this little paragraph. But then, I'd like to ask you, how do you see humans [00:26:00] co-evolving with their technologies? For example, our form of performativity on the screen becomes a habit beyond the screen.

Carlos: Even before homo sapiens, the most advanced hominids, let's say at the time, created stone tools. We have discovered that all Neanderthals had a very sophisticated culture, including almost religious practices, beyond the material question of building artifacts. In other words, our species is unthinkable without technology, whether it be a stone axe or TikTok or a smartphone.

So, we have to take this into account when we analyze any kind of daily interaction, we are surrounded by technology and here, obviously, the McLuhanian idea is fundamental. We create these media. We create these technologies.

These technologies also reformat us. [00:27:00] McLuhan, I don't remember him using the concept of coevolution, but it's there. He's talking about that.

Now, there is a coevolution, if you will, in the very long term, which, for example, we know that the development of stone tools, the development of fire, meant that homo sapiens did not need such a large jaw to be able to chew food. And that produces a whole change, which made the jaw smaller, leaving more space in the brain, etc., etc. That is a coevolution in genetic terms, let's say in the very long term, okay.

Also the erectile position, etc., etc. But, let's say that there were already human technologies co-evolving with these very, very slow genetic changes.

But now we can also say that this co-evolution is already at the level of neuronal structure, so it has been verified by neuroscience, as I said before. There is a physical change in the structure of the brain throughout a person's life due to interaction with certain technologies. And why does that happen?

Because [00:28:00] production, creation of new media, new technologies has been accelerating more and more. There we can make an exponential curve upwards, for some this began 10,000 years ago. For some this accelerated with the industrial revolution. Some speak of the time of the discovery of America.

Well, for some this is a 20th century phenomenon. The fact is that in almost geological terms, what we are talking about as the Anthropocene is real and is linked to the impact of human beings on our environment and technology is part of this exponential process of co-evolution.

Today we feel overwhelmed by this acceleration of technology and our need, perhaps to adapt and co-evolve with it. Like this thing where everything goes so fast. Every week there is a new problem, a new application. Now we have artificial intelligence, etc., etc.

But this feeling [00:29:00] It's not new. It's a feeling of modernity. If you read things written in 1800, when the train arrived, people also complained that the world was moving too fast. Where are we going to end up with this iron horse that gives off smoke? So this feeling of rapid change was already experienced by previous generations. But evidently, change today is much faster and more intense than two centuries ago. And that is also true.

So, well, our faith is co-evolving and we are adapting as we can. I asked this question 10 years ago to Kevin Kelly, the first director of Wire magazine, who we brought to Barcelona and who is always very optimistic. Kevin Kelly is a technological determinist and an optimist at the same time.

He said, "It's good that homo sapiens is doing quite well. This co-evolution with technology." Other people have a [00:30:00] radically opposite view, that this is the end of the world, that homo sapiens are doomed to disappear due to this accelerated co-evolution, that the new generations are increasingly stupid.

I don't believe that. I believe, like McLuhan, that the media reforms us, it changes some things for us to live, and others perhaps not so much, but no, I don't have an apocalyptic vision of this at all.

Chris: Okay, okay. So when you mentioned the television, I remember a lot from my childhood and I don't know why. Maybe it was something normal at that time to see the TV as a monster, as you said or maybe because my parents were immigrants but it was a lot of their idea of that technology and they always told me like no, no, don't stay there so close and all that.

So, even though they accepted it, they understood that the power [00:31:00] that television had over people. So now everyone, it seems to me, that everyone has their own channel, not their own programming, or the right or privilege to have their own channel or multiple channels.

So, it's a great question, but what do you think are the main consequences of giving everyone their own program in the sense of what is the effect of doing that, of perhaps democratizing technology in that sense?

Carlos: When you say your own channel, you mean the possibility of broadcasting or building your own media diet.

Chris: Well first, but it can be both, of course, right? I mean, my ability to have a personal profile or account. And then, like, the end of tourism, right? And then another one.

Carlos: Yes, let's see. I think that, well, this was the great radical change that began to occur in the decade of 2000 or [00:32:00] that is, 25 years ago. Because the web at the beginning was a global network in the 90s. But of course the possibility of sharing content and everyone being able to see it was very limited to creating a web page, etc. When social networks or Web 2.0 as it was called at that time appeared and mobile devices were added, that's when this widespread culture of content creation began to be generated.

So, let's say that up until that point, the content creators were more or less professionals in radio and television, but also on the web or in the press or in cinema. And from there, let's say, the game begins to open up.

At the time, this was very well received, it was so good! This is going to lead us to a more democratic society. 25 years later, of course, we are only seeing the dark side. I think that the mistake 25 years ago was to only think about the good, optimistic possibilities of this . And today it seems to me that we are entangled in only apocalyptic speeches, right?

We don't see the good things, we only see the bad things. I think there are both today. Sure, today anyone can have a channel, yes, but not everyone creates a channel. The levels of participation are very strange, that is, the majority of the user population enters the networks. Look. Like. Maybe a comment. Every now and then share a photo.

Let's say that "heavy users" or "heavy producers" of content are always a minority, whether they are professionals, influencers, streamers, right? It's always the case, I don't know if we are at 20-80 or 10-90, are these curves always like this? No?

If you look at Wikipedia, there are 5-10 percent of people who generate content, even less. And 90 percent who [00:34:00] benefit from the work of a minority. Does this reverse the logic of capitalism? The majority lives off the minority and this happened before in other systems as well. So in that sense, it is only a minority of people who generate content of impact, let's call it that, of greater reach.

But well, I think that the fact that anyone can make that leap is fine for me. It creates another set of problems, right? Because while someone is generating content, whether they are a professional or a journalist, let's say, there are still some ethical standards that they must comply with, right? I see that in the world of streamers, the world of Tik tokers, etc., etc., the first thing they say is, we are not journalists.

And in this way, they are inhibited from any ethical control or respect for professional ethical standards. On the other hand, the platforms [00:35:00] Meta, Google, all of them. The first thing they tell you is that we are not a media outlet. The content is provided by the people.

We have nothing to do with that. Of course, they also break away from all regulations there. That's why it had to be done. Europe and the United States had to pass special laws because they said no, no, the laws of journalism don't apply to us. We are not content editors.

And it is a lie because the platforms do edit content through algorithms, because the algorithms are not there, they are telling us what we can see and what is not on the front page. They are not filtering information, in other words, they are editing. So, it seems that these mistakes are generated.

And that is one of the elements that this contamination that I mentioned before brings to the communication field. But I, if I had to choose an ecosystem with few speakers, few media controlled by professionals and this chaotic ecosystem [00:36:00] partly contaminated with many actors and many voices, I prefer the chaos of today to the poverty of the previous system.

I prefer to deal with, fight with and try to solve the problem of having too much information, than the problem of censorship and having only two or three points where information is generated. I have lived in Argentina with a military dictatorship with tight control of the media, colonels intervening in radio and television who controlled everything that was said.

And I prefer today's chaos, even with fake news and everything else you want. I prefer today's chaos to that situation.

Chris: Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. It's very hard to think about for people who haven't lived through something like that, right? I mean, some extended family members have lived in communist worlds, in the past in Eastern Europe, and they don't speak [00:37:00] exactly like that.

But, they talk about it, right? And they say to each other that what they did not have and what they do not have by control and by force. So, in that same sense of what is missing from lived memory, I would like to ask you about your new book. And about the evolution of the media. Then I would like to ask you the same about our listeners who perhaps have not studied much about the ecology of the media.

For you, what is media evolution and why is it important for our changing and understanding of the world? That is, just alongside and not just attached to media ecology, but media evolution,

Carlos: Yes, I tell you, there is a discipline there, already traditional, which is history, and there is also the history of communication and history of the media. [00:38:00] There are very interesting books titled History of Communication from Gutenberg to the Internet or History of Communication from Papyrus to Tiktok.

So, what happens? These books tell you, well, there was papyrus, then came parchment, the manuscript, then in 1450 came Gutenberg, the book. But the book doesn't tell you what happened to the manuscript, or what happened to the papyrus. And they tell you that the radio arrived in 1920 and in 1950 television arrived, and they don't tell you what happened to the radio, what happened to the cinema.

These are linear stories where one medium seems to replace the other. And then we have many very good books as well. History of radio, history of television, history of the internet, history of journalism. As I said before, taking up an idea from McLuhan, we cannot understand the media in isolation.

I cannot understand the evolution of radio if I do not link it to the press, to [00:39:00] television and another to podcasts. Okay, so I say, we need a field of research, let's call it a discipline under construction, which is a theory and is also a methodology to be able to understand media change, all these transformations of the media ecosystem in the long term and that it is not a succession of media, but rather, to see how that media network was evolving. And I call that an evolutionary theory or a "media evolution"

And that's what I'm working on now. Of course, this theory, this approach, this field of research takes a lot of things from media ecology, starting with Marshall McLuhan but also people from the pre-media ecology tradition like Harold Innis, the great historian, economist of communication and society, who was perhaps the most famous intellectual in Canada in the first half of the 20th century. Harold Innis, who greatly influenced Marshall McLuhan [00:40:00]

Marshall McLuhann, on the first page of Gutenberg Galaxy, says that this book is nothing more than a footnote to the work of Harold Innis. So, Harold Innis, who made a history of ancient times, putting the media at the centre of that history. For me, he is fundamental. I would even say that sometimes he is more than McLuhan, as a reference, when it comes to making an evolutionary theory of media change. And then, obviously, I take many things from the history of the media.

I take a lot of things from media archaeology. I also take things from people who have researched the history of technology, the social construction of technology. I mean, media evolution is an intertextual field, like any discipline that takes things from all these fields to be able to build a theory, an approach, a look that is more long-term, that is not a succession of media, but that looks at the evolution of the entire media ecosystem, paying a lot of attention to the relationships [00:41:00] between media, and with this more complex systemic vision of how things change.

I think that the media changes very quickly and we need a theory to be able to make sense of all this great change, because if we only analyse very micro, very small things, we don't see the big changes. We can't position ourselves... this is a bit like football. The best players are those who have the game in their heads and know where everything is. They're not looking at the ball, but they know where the other players are.

Well, I think that media evolution is useful for that. Beyond the fact that today we are all talking about generative AI. Right? Having this overall vision of the entire media and technological ecosystem, I think it is very useful.

Chris: Mm. Wow. Amazing, amazing. Yeah. Yeah. I think a lot about how the new generations or the younger generations today. I mean, [00:42:00] at least younger than me, which most of them are like 20 years old today, they don't have a vivid memory of what the world would be like without social media or the internet. And as I think about my life and how I am, I don't have a memory of life as if the world were without screens of any kind, I mean TV or computers. Not just the internet or networks.

Carlos: Yes, no, I was telling you that my father lived, my father is 90 years old and he remembers in the year 58, 59, his house was the first in a neighborhood of Rosario that had television and they broadcast from six, seven in the afternoon. So all the neighbors came to watch television at my grandmother's house. So each one, each generation has its stories. Right?

Chris: Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. And also, like you said, to [00:43:00] understand media as individual subjects or objects, in other words, in their own world, right? I'm reminded a little bit of Robin Wall Kimmerer's metaphor, who wrote a book called Braiding Sweetgrass, I guess, in Spanish. And she mentioned that to understand the indigenous understanding, let's say in quotes, of time, we don't need to think of a line, an arrow from the past to the future. But, a lake, while the past, present, and future exist, at the same time, in that lake.

And I also think about the place, the past, present, and future, like all those environments existing at the same time, like in a lake and obviously in an ecology of its evolution of its changes.

Carlos: That's very interesting. I'll ask you for the reference to the book later because, of course, [00:44:00] McLuhan always said that the content of a medium is another medium. So, it can happen that a medium from the past leaves its mark or influences a medium from the future. And then the timeline breaks. And those are the phenomena that I'm interested in studying.

Chris: Mmm, mmm, well Carlos, to finish, I have two last questions for you. This time a bit aligned with tourism, and although you are not focused so much on the study of tourism. Through my studies and research and through this podcast, I have amplified that definition of tourism to see how it would exist beyond an industry. And for me, tourism also includes the desire to see a person, a place or a culture as a destination, as something useful, temporary in its use value and therefore disposable. So, I would like to [00:45:00] ask you, if for you it seems that our popular media, although this is a time, let's say with more freedom than other places or times in the past, more authoritarian or totalitarian? Do you see the possibility or evidence that our media, let's say as the most used mainstream, are creating or promoting a, a sense of alienation in people by effectively keeping them at a distance from the other.

Carlos: I already told you no, I don't have an apocalyptic vision of the media. I never did. This doesn't mean that the media, as we said before, has problems. It also generates pollution. Let's call it that if we continue with the metaphor, ? The issue of alienation has been around for [00:46:00] many years. Even when I was studying at university, I never got into theories of alienation.

The concept of alienation comes from the 19th century. A whole theory of consciousness, the subject, the proletarian, let's call it, so it had to become class conscious. Well, the roots of that vision of the concept of alienation come from there. I was never convinced by it, precisely. And here it is interesting.

Latin America's contribution to communication theories has always been different. It has been about claiming the re-signification, the re-semanticization of the active role of the receiver, when many times the theories that came from Europe or the United States had this vision of the receiver of communication as a passive being.

In that sense, media ecology never entered into that discourse because it was handled with other parameters, but let's say that what was the mainstream of research in the United States, but also in Europe, always agreed on this in considering the passive, alienated, [00:47:00] stupefied receiver by the media. And I really was never convinced by that approach, neither before nor today, nor with the television of the 70s and 80s, nor with today's TikTok.

This doesn't mean that there may be people who have some addiction, etc., etc. But I don't think that all of society is addicted to the small screen today. It's no longer an addiction. Okay. This doesn't mean that we shouldn't have a critical vision. This doesn't mean that we should eventually regulate the use of certain technologies, obviously.

But from there to thinking that we are in an apocalyptic scenario, of total idiocy of homo sapiens or alienation. I do not see it, nor do I believe that empirical studies confirm that. Beyond that, sometimes there are elections and we do not like the results.

But that's interesting, because when your own political party loses, the media is always blamed because the other party won. But when your political party wins, nobody says anything about the media. We won because we are better, [00:48:00] because we have better ideas, because we are more democratic, because we are more beautiful.

So, of course you realize that the media is used as a scapegoat to avoid recognizing one's own political weaknesses when it comes to denouncing a proposal or seducing the electorate.

Chris: Sure, sure. Well, these topics are vast and complex. And that's why I like it, and that's why I'm very grateful to spend this time with you, Carlos.

But the issues require a deep discipline to understand, or at least according to me, as someone who is very new to these issues. So, in our time, it seems like we are, according to me, being dragged along at an unprecedented speed. Our technologies are advancing and perhaps simultaneously undermining our ability to understand what is going on in the world. We use them in protest sometimes as, as you mentioned, [00:49:00] but without a deeper understanding of how they use us as well.

So I'm curious to know what role media ecology plays in redeeming or healing culture in our time. How might media ecology be an ally, perhaps, in our journeys?

Carlos: Yes, I think this idea was present, right? In the media ecology theorists, let's say the first generation.

Now that I think about it, it was also in Umberto Eco's semiotics, wasn't it? When he said that semiotics, beyond analyzing how meaning is constructed, also contributes to improving meaningful life, that is, cultural life, communicational life, our functioning as a subject, let's say. And I think that in that sense, media ecology does too.

Let's say, if we understand the media ecosystem, we will be able to take advantage of it better [00:50:00] and co-evolve better. We will also be more responsible when it comes to generating content, when it comes to retweeting certain things in a sometimes automatic way. I think that it is all a matter of growing up in a healthy media life, and I think that this possibility exists today.

I've been on Twitter since 2008-2009 and only twice have I had a run-in and blocked a rude person. After that, the rest of my life on Twitter is rich in contact information. I learn a lot, I find out about things that are being investigated. I mean, there are also other things to choose from.

And for example, where I see that there are networks that don't give me anything, I don't even go directly. It's also about learning to get the best out of this media ecosystem. And the same for the natural ecosystem. Just as we are learning to care about where our food comes from, [00:51:00] How long will it take for this mobile phone to dissolve because of the components it has? Well, it is also about becoming aware of that. Whether in the natural world, or in the world of communication. And I think that all this knowledge, in this case, media ecology, helps us to understand that, right? And to improve ourselves as subjects, since we are no longer the centre of the universe, which is the other issue. We are one more atom lost in a very large complexity.

Chris: Mm. Mm, well, these works and jobs and studies of yours and others give us the ability to read and understand that complexity, right?

I mean, it seems more and more complex and it requires more and more discernment from us. So, I think that we have put a lot into your will and ability to [00:52:00] do that and put it into the world. So, finally Carlos, I would like to extend my gratitude and that of our listeners for your time today, your consideration and your work.

I feel like, well, media literacy and media ecology are sorely lacking in our time and your willingness to ask about these things and write about them is medicine for a broken world and for me a tourist. So, so thank you so much, Carlos, for coming today.

Carlos: Thank you. I appreciate your questions. And well, I think that the topic of tourism is a central topic today. If you were in Barcelona, you would see that this topic is being debated every day. So I think that well, go ahead with this reflection and this research on tourism, because it is very pertinent and necessary.

Chris: Well, yes, thank you. [00:53:00] I also feel that there is a strong connection between those broader definitions of tourism and media ecology. I mean, it's opened up a very big window for me to understand tourism more deeply. So before we finish, Carlos, how can our listeners find your books and your work?

I know we've talked about two books you've written, but there's so much more. So much more. So how can people find them and find you?

Carlos: The quickest way is on my blog, which is hipermediaciones.com

There you will find information about all the books I publish, etc., etc. And then, well, I am very active, as I said on Twitter X. You can find me under the letter CEscolari and Carlos is my Twitter. And well, there I also try to spread information about these [00:54:00] topics.

As I said before, I learn a lot from that network and I also try to give back what they give me by always putting up relevant information. Good links. And not fighting too much.

Chris: Okay, okay, so I'm going to make sure those links and those pages are already in the homework section of the End of Tourism website when the episode comes out.

The same goes for other interviews and your books. There's no shortage of them. So, I'm happy to share them. Well, Carlos, thank you very much and I appreciate it very much.

Carlos: Thank you very much and see you in Mexico.

Leave a comment

Subscribe now

S6 #6 | Hacia Turismos Postcapitalistas | Ernest Cañada (Alba Sud)

Tue, 20 May 2025 14:08:42 GMT

Mi entrevistado en este episodio es Ernest Cañada. Es coordinador de Alba Sud y docente de la Universidad de Barcelona. Investiga en torno al trabajo, los conflictos socioecológicos y las alternativas en el desarrollo turístico. Ha publicado: Viajar a todo tren. Turismo, desarrollo y sostenibilidad (Icaria, 2005, con Jordi Gascón); Turismo en Centroamérica: un nuevo escenario de conflictividad social (Enlace Editorial, 2010); Turismo placebo. Nueva colonización turística: del Mediterráneo a Mesoamérica y El Caribe. Lógicas espaciales del capital turístico (Enlace Editorial, 2011, con Macià Blàzquez); El turismo en el inicio del milenio: una lectura crítica a tres voces (FTR, 2012, con Jordi Gascón y Joan Buades); Turismos en Centroamérica. Un diagnóstico para el debate (Enlace Editorial, 2013); Turismo comunitario en Centroamérica. Experiencias y aprendizajes (Enlace Editorial, 2014).

Notas del Episodio

Alba Sud y su historia
El despojo en Nicaragua
El surgimiento de turismo en Costa Rica como una herramienta neoliberal
El Malestar en la Turistificación: Pensamiento Crítico Para Una Transformación de Turismo
El fin de turismo barato y el policrisis de hoy
Postcapitalismo y terminos complementarios
Monstruos peores
Aprender poner limites
La pluralidad de posibilidades de turismos postcapitalistas

Tarea

El malestar en la turistificación. Pensamiento crítico para una transformación del turismo - Icaria Editorial
Alba Sud - Facebook - Instagram - Twitter
#TourismPostCOVID19. Turistificación confinada
Ernest Cañada - Facebook - Instagram - Twitter

Transcripcion en espanol (English Below)

Chris: [00:00:00] Bienvenido Ernest, al podcast del fin de turismo.

Ernest: Muchas gracias. Muy encantado estar aquí.

Chris: igual es un gran honor poder hablar finalmente contigo. Mi pregunto si, pues, para empezar, si podrías decirnos de este, dónde hablas hoy y cómo es el mundo allá por ti?

Ernest: Yo habitualmente resido en Barcelona, entre Barcelona y Mallorca, porque estoy entre la universidad de las Islas Baleares y Alba Sud, y en estos momentos estoy en Buenos Aires que estoy trabajando en una investigación sobre experiencias de gestión distinta, fuera de las lógicas del capitalismo. Y esto nos llevo a identificar distintas experiencias. Y ahora estoy empezando una investigación con el Hotel Bauen, a lo que fue el Hotel Bauen y a cerrado y la cooperativa que lo gestionó durante 20 años,

Es parte el proceso que estamos haciendo, identificación [00:01:00] de experiencias diversas plurales que tienen que ver con como pensar la posibilidad de organizar el turismo bajo otros modos y esto nos elevado por caminos distintos de América Latina, de España. Y ahora estoy aquí.

Chris: Pues gracias Ernest. Y si vamos a estar hablando de ese tema pero más allá de las vision que que hay, que existe, que podemos imaginar sobre un turismo post-capitalista o algo alrededor, algo así. Pero antes de meternos en eso, pues tú y yo hemos estado en contacto durante los últimos dos años, en parte debido a tu trabajo en el ámbito de los estudios críticos de turismo y a tu proyecto Alba Sud que en algunos de nuestros invitados anteriores incluidos de Ivan Murray, Robert Fletcher y Macia Blasquez ha participado.

Me encantaría que pudieras contarme un poco [00:02:00] sobre Alba Sud, Ernest, su misión, su historia y su situación actual

Ernest: Con mucho gusto. Ah, mira, Alba Sud nace en 2008. Legalmente lo habíamos legalizado antes por si algún grupo de compañeros por si algún día nos hacía falta, pero formalmente empieza a funcionar el año 2008 y empieza a funcionar en Managua, Nicaragua, que era donde yo residía en ese momento.

Y fundamentalmente fue un acuerdo de personas que nos dedicábamos a la investigación y a la comunicación para trabajar con análisis críticos y al mismo tiempo propositivos en torno al turismo. Esto fue algo que fue original desde el principio, esta doble preocupación, por cómo pensar los impactos, los efectos que tenía el desarrollo turístico bajo el capitalismo y que tipo de dinámicas de violencia estructural y directa generaban y al mismo tiempo, cómo pensar posibilidades de salir de ese [00:03:00] marco de esas lógicas. Y eso fue un sello que desde el principio empezamos.

Con los años Alba Sud fue creciendo, integrándose como una red de investigadoras e investigadores en turismo. Ahora tenemos presencia en 10 países en España, en Francia, en Europa, y luego en América latina, en la República Dominicana, en México, en El Salvador, Nicaragua, Costa Rica, Brasil, Uruguay y Argentina.

Entonces es una red que conformamos gentes que nos dedicamos a distintos ámbitos de la análisis turístico y que compartimos espacios de trabajo y análisis e intervención política. Para nosotros, Alba Sud es un centro de investigación, pero no es un centro académico si nos preocupa menos las dinámicas académicas, aunque hay una parte de nuestro equipo de personas que colaboran que están en la universidad, distintas universidades.

Lo que nos preocupa es cómo generar [00:04:00] conocimiento que sea útil para las comunidades, para las organizaciones comunitarias, para las asociaciones civiles, para sindicatos, para cuando es posible la administración pública. Es decir, intentamos generar conocimiento, análisis sistematización, propuestas que de alguna manera contribuyen a hacer visible las cosas que funcionan mal, que son un desastre que generan dolor en este mundo en relación con el turismo y al mismo tiempo, a pensar horizontes de esperanza.

Este es un poco el propósito. Para ello, nos dotamos de eso de un equipo amplio de personas que colaboran unas más estrechamente con el día a día, otras que puntualmente colaboran y montamos básicamente nuestros trabajos se articula en torno a una web, la www.AlbaSud.Org, y lo estructuramos en trabajos de investigación que salen después en un formato [00:05:00] escrito por distintas formas, que luego te cuento un trabajo, además de la forma de la investigación, vinculado a la formación a poner a generar procesos de diálogo que nos permitan escuchar, reflexionar conjuntamente, poniendo en el mismo nivel personas que vienen de la academia con personas que tienen experiencias concretas de trabajo. Y finalmente, un ámbito más de incidencia política, más de acompañamiento organizaciones y de acompañarles para incidir políticamente.

En el ámbito de la investigación, luego lo expresamos, básicamente a través de unos artículos cortos que hacemos, publicamos alrededor de 100, 110, 120 al año, que son artículos cortos de 2000-2500 palabras, que sabemos que son muy usados en las universidades, como material de discusión.

Y un poco del propósito es este que se hiervan como pequeñas artículos bien escritos o intentamos que estén bien [00:06:00] escritos, que estén en un lenguaje simple, que la complejidad no tiene que ver con las palabrotas académicas que usamos, sino la profundidad del pensamiento que incorporan, pero que tienen que estar poder ser leídas por mucha gente.

Tenemos esto. Luego, pusimos en marcha un sello editorial propio que es Alba Sud Editorial, en el cual tenemos una colección de libros, una de informes y recientemente una de policy brief más dirigidos a recomendaciones de política. Y básicamente Alba Sud eso. Es un espacio de encuentro entre personas que no nos resignamos a pensar que el desarrollo turístico necesariamente tenga que comportar esto, que estamos acompañando las resistencias, las luchas de los muchos males y violencias que genera este desarrollo capitalista a través del turismo y que al mismo tiempo, intentamos construir lo que decía antes "horizontes de esperanza" que nos permitan estimular la lucha y la resistencia, [00:07:00] pensando en en futuros más deseables que es creo que en estos momentos también necesitamos.

Chris: Gracias, Ernest. Sí. Pues por lo que he visto, lo que he leído, lo que he encontrado ahi en el sitio de Alba Sud. Pues es, es una organización y sitio único en el mundo. Y pues yo tengo mucho honor de estar contigo hoy hablando de estas cosas y especialmente contigo como el fundador, Y entonces, para agregar, para profundizar un poco más de la historia, de tu historia, la próxima pregunta viene de nuestro amigo mutuo compañero Macía Blasquez a quien entrevisté en la temporada cuatro. Europa. Y el pregunta, "afirma que tú has sido entre muchas otras cosas activista en Centroamérica, como nos dijiste, y entonces él quiere saber cómo han cambiado tus opiniones y tu carrera de este [00:08:00] entonces?"

Ernest: Buena pregunta.

Ah, yo empecé a trabajar en Centroamérica acompañando. Bueno, primero pasé seis años que iba y venía. Estaba medio año en Centroamérica más o menos a otro medio en España. Y finalmente me quedé a trabajar en Nicaragua con una organización que se le llamaba "Luciérnaga" ahora "Ilegalizada," dedicada a la comunicación.

Y desde ahí empezamos a organizar campañas de comunicación en distintos temas que tenían que ver con las necesidades y los derechos de la mayoría de la gente y de como estaban sufriendo procesos de despojo de posesión. Y trabajamos en torno a temas que tenían que ver con la salud y los derechos sexuales o reproductivos o la soberanía alimentaria. Y en una de estas, organizamos una campaña que duró cuatro años de investigación y comunicación sobre turismo.

En un contexto, estoy hablando del año [00:09:00] 2004-2008, en el cual Nicaragua se estaba abriendo al turismo en esos momentos. Y entonces identificábamos claramente los altos niveles de violencia que eso podía comportar con procesos de desplazamiento.

Y había que acompañar a las comunidades en esas dinámicas, y que además eran compartidas en El Salvador, en Guatemala, en Honduras, en Costa Rica y al mismo tiempo, empezar a pensar posibilidades de "si era posible utilizar el turismo bajo el control de las propias comunidades." Esa fue mi mi inserción en el mundo fundamentalmente del turismo.

Y a partir de ahí, después de trabajar unos cuatro años en Luciérnaga y pusimos en marcha Alba Sud y en parte recuperamos en Alba Sud esa especialización vinculado con el turismo. Pensábamos, y es algo que hemos reflectado muchas veces con Ivan Murray que también le entrevistaste que no nos estábamos dando cuenta desde el mundo de las [00:10:00] izquierdas de la importancia que tenía el turismo para el funcionamiento al capitalismo.

Y a veces cuando decíamos que nos necesitábamos al turismo, la gente lo tomaba como algo como irrelevante, como algo superficial, incluso casi jocoso como te gusta viajar, verdad? Y entonces era como, como no darse cuenta de, por un lado, como sobre todo desde la aplicación de los programas neoliberales, cómo el el turismo estaba ayudando a expandir los procesos de desarrollo capitalista, pero al mismo tiempo, como tenía una segunda función muy importante que era, cómo ayudaba a a estabilizar los desórdenes que provocaba ese mismo programa neoliberal?

Recuerdo que me impresionó mucho trabajando en Costa Rica cuando me di cuenta que el año 1985, cuando se aplican los programas de ajuste estructural, [00:11:00] una de las cosas que se hace es desmontar el CNP, que era el consejo nacional de producción, que era lo que permitía durante bastantes años, que el campesinado costarricense tuviera la seguridad de que los granos básicos, frijoles, arroz, maíz tenía donde venderlos con precios estables. Y esto le daba seguridad al campesinado.

Esto el año en el marco de la aplicación de esas políticas neoliberales que eran de hecho un chantaje, decir bueno, en un contexto de crisis de la deuda o aplicas determinadas programas políticos para liberalizar el comercio o no tienes apoyo en ese contexto, la contrapartida de achicar el estado y reducirlo.

Y uno de los ejes de disminución del gasto público fue, por ejemplo, desmontar el CNP, este consejo nacional de producción. Y a cambio, lo que se pedía al campesinado estimularlo en la producción [00:12:00] de cultivos que tuvieran supuestamente mejor inserción en el mercado internacional para atraer la llegada de divisas.

Y ahí se promovía la vainilla, la curcuma, la pimienta, productos que al final no acabaron de funcionar. Pero al mismo tiempo se promovió el turismo rural como un mecanismo para que el campesinado, por una parte, aportara con esa desarrollo de servicios turísticos divisas, al mismo tiempo le permitiera estabilizarse y no comprometerse en una dinámica que tenía que ver con el sufrimiento que estaban viviendo, que estaban generando procesos migratorios muy grandes.

Entonces, con Iván, una de las cosas que reflexionábamos es, esto del turismo empieza a ser muy importante para el capitalismo. Y después de la crisis de 2008 creo que tuvimos bastante conciencia de que la dinámica de solución que encuentre el capitalismo para su [00:13:00] reproducción en parte tiene que ver con la expansión del turismo.

Y esto lo hemos visto después de la crisis de la COVID con la pandemia que tuvimos en la cual... recuerdo perfectamente una llamada que nos hicimos con Iván, decíamos no nos puede pasar en 2020 lo mismo que nos pasó en 2008, que no nos dimos cuenta hasta mucho después de lo que estaba ocurriendo. Y por tanto, dijimos "paremos todas las publicaciones que tenemos pendientes y pidamos a todo el equipo amplio que está en torno de Alba Sud, pongámonos a reflexionar y analizaron que nos equivoquemos, pero pongámonos a analizar que cambios supone esto."

Y en ese memento, alguna gente se reía de nosotros. Decía que seamos futurologia, que si habíamos convertido Alba Sud en una bola de cristal y que pretendíamos invocar el futuro. Y de hecho, lo que intentábamos hacer era el análisis desde la economía política para entender qué es lo que nos venía encima y de alguna manera, respondiendo a la pregunta que nos hacía [00:14:00] Macia, yo creo que lo que ha cambiado mi pensamiento es la intuición.

O sea lo que antes era una intuición de que debíamos trabajar, generando conocimiento fuera de las lógicas de la reproducción académica y teníamos que generar conocimiento vinculado a los problemas sentidos por la gente más desfavorecida, que esa institución estaba en lo cierto y que había un espacio para hacer eso y que era necesario hacerlo.

Y que este era un espacio que debíamos construir en relación con el mundo de las universidades de la academia, pero independiente de él, pero también independiente de las empresas, que es lo que vimos que también les había ocurrido algunas ONGs que durante años trabajaron tratando de generar algún tipo de pensamiento en torno de turismo, pero que rápidamente habían caído en una cierta trampa de pensar que era posible incidir en las empresas, generar dinámicas de responsabilidad, etcétera. Y nosotros pensamos que la cosa no iba por ahí, que la cosa tenía que ver con cómo [00:15:00] fortalecíamos otros actores para que pudieran combatir, resistir y construir cosas fuera de los marcos del capitalismo.

Entonces, yo creo que, no sé si cambiaron muchas las cosas en términos de pensamiento, pero si se consolidó una convicción de lo que empezamos a hacer de una forma un poco intuitiva, se acabó convirtiendo en un espacio de investigación, de colaboración, de acompañamiento, de formación, de ciencia política para para un montón de gente que está vinculado con el turismo.

Chris: Yeah. Gracias, Ernest. Pues yo siento que esa intuicion ha abierto un montón en los últimos años. Y hay un montón de gente en muchos lados, normalmente los lugares turisteados o sobreturisteados dando cuenta y dando cuenta no solo de [00:16:00] las consecuencias, pero de los patrones y pues, a dónde vamos con los patrones o canales de turismo convencional, pero también, como dijiste, en el turismo, como un gran factor dentro de la expansión y destrucción del capitalismo en nuestro tiempo.

Entonces, a través de Alba Sud y Icaria Editorial en España, ustedes han publicado recientemente una antología titulada El Malestar en la Turistificación: Pensamiento Crítico Para Una Transformación de Turismo. Hay toneladas de capítulos fascinantes, tengo que decir, de excelentes autores y investigadores, incluidos trabajos que hacen referencia Silvia Federici y David Harvey, Pierre Biourdeau, Donna Haraway, Foucault, Graeber, y Ursula Le Guin, entre otros. [00:17:00] Estoy curioso, Ernest, cuál fue el impulso detrás de la creación de este antología?

Ernest: Muchas veces, buena parte de las cosas que hacemos o que impulsamos de que son más grandes, vienen de una llamada telefónica con Ivan Murray y nos llamamos decimos, "tenemos que hacer esto, tenemos que hacerlo otro."

Y de estas llamadas, lo que acabamos, y luego es algunos elevándolas a cabo. En este caso concreto, recurrentemente, teníamos una reflexión que cada vez era menos interesante leer sobre el turismo o que nos interesaba menos leer sobre turismo y que para entender el turismo, necesitábamos leer otras cosas. Y incluso la gente que nos dedicamos a los análisis críticos del turismo, nos dábamos cuenta de que estábamos leyendo mucho solamente entre nosotros.

Y que de alguna manera estábamos reproduciendo lo mismo que le pasaba la academia vinculada al turismo. Es una academia muy endogámica, [00:18:00] muy auto concentrada que discute los mismos temas que se cita unos a otros y nos dábamos cuenta que de alguna manera, los que nos dictábamos a la crítica y a la propuesta fuera de esos marcos, teníamos el riesgo de no estar captando parte de la complejidad que tenía el desarrollo turístico en la medida que este se estaba haciendo cada vez más grande y que estaba penetrando en más esferas de la vida. Y ahí la idea fue, necesitamos hacer cuando compartíamos con Iván y luego se sumó Clément Marie dit Chirot, que es un profesor de la Universidad de Angers, que colabora también con con Alba Sud.

De ahí surgió la idea de decir bueno, nos compartíamos tú que estás leyendo, que te está interesando. Y ahí empezamos a compartir autores y autoras. Y nació la idea deberíamos hacer algo con esto. Hicimos un primer seminario en Barcelona sobre la obra de David Harvey y en Lefevbre de qué nos pueden aportar estos dos autores a la comprensión [00:19:00] actual del desarrollo turístico.

Y fue un seminario por eso el libro en parte, a veces la gente dice, por qué tanto Harvey y tanto Lefevbre, porque el origen del libro tenía que ver con este primer seminario que fue una prueba, un ensayo, de cómo podemos hacer que autores que no necesariamente han hablado sobre turismo, cómo podemos hacer que dialogan con nuestro objeto de de análisis?

Y ahí hicimos un poco el mismo llamado que habíamos hecho en 2020 en cuando empezamos a trabajar en torno de la pandemia, que eso se convirtió en dos libros. Uno que fue Turistificación Confinada y otro Turismos de Proximidad, que fue el mismo proceso de empezar a preguntar a nuestros colegas, amigos, compañeros y compañeras, en qué estaban trabajando, que estaban viendo que estaban...

Pues hicimos lo mismo, empezar a preguntar en nuestro entorno del equipo de Alba Sud, personas que colaboran, qué autores estaban leyendo que les interesaba y que no hubieran hablado antes de turismo? Y como [00:20:00] podíamos hacer el ejercicio de llevarlos a los análisis turísticos con el fin de robustecerlos, de hacerlos más sólidos, de incorporar dimensiones que si solamente nos fijábamos en lo que veníamos leyendo y escribiendo sobre el turismo, a lo mejor se nos estaban escapando. Por supuesto, nos quedaron un montón de trabajos de referencias fuera de este marco, es decir nos salía un volumen con 25 capítulos y nos podía haber salido perfectamente un segundo volumen, que es algo que no descartamos, pero no en términos inmediatos por el cantidad de trabajo que también supone.

Pero si logramos poner en diálogo una serie de personas que nos permitían, de alguna manera, enriquecer el análisis turístico y brindar a gente que se estaban metiendo en determinados temas desde el ámbito de la comprensión, de lo como funciona el turismo, encontrar referencias teóricas, críticas con el capitalismo que le pudieran ayudar a [00:21:00] como mínimo, abrir caminos, entender qué lecturas podríamos hacer a partir de ellas.

Seguro que hay autoras o autores que podrían haber tenido otro tipo de lectura, pero es la que hicieron las personas que colaboran con nosotros y de alguna manera era una de las posibles lecturas. Y bueno, ese es el origen del libro y la motivación.

Chris: Ajá. Y me gustaría preguntarte sobre, pues, tu capítulo sobre Eric Ollin Wright, pero antes de eso, me gustaría preguntarte qué tipo de reflexiones te sorprendiste más fuera de tus propios investigaciones?

Ernest: Sí, Ivan, Clemente y yo no solo lemos, sino que editamos y discutimos todos los capítulos.

Tuvimos que rechazar lamentablemente también algunos. En algunos casos, había gente que nos mandó escritos que eran más complejos que el propio autor. Elegimos necesitamos que se entienda o en otros casos, la lectura no nos interesaba mucho. [00:22:00] No fue que aceptáramos todo, en este proceso.

Y para mí, uno de los descubrimientos fue Jason Moore y el trabajo que hizo Iván con él para pensar o plantear la hipótesis del fin del turismo barato. Esto ha dado lugar un proyecto de investigación en el que estamos en la Universidad de Las Islas Baleares, con el grupo CRIGUST en el que estoy trabajando, pensando decir, bueno, qué significa este escenario de emergencias crónicas, esta dinámica, la cual el capitalismo ha funcionado a partir de la lógica de disponer de naturalezas baratas... qué significa si esto empieza a acabarse? Y hasta qué punto este modelo de desarrollo turístico que hemos tenido las últimas décadas en realidad no está objeto a demasiadas tensiones? Está demasiado en crisis y habría que tal vez plantear la hipótesis del fin del turismo barato, pero la [00:23:00] apertura de nuevos escenarios y sobre esta hipótesis estamos estamos desarrollando un proyecto de investigación y de alguna manera también ha servido para nosotros desde Alba Sud para pensar los escenarios de esta dinámica de reactivación. Decir no, no todo es igual a lo que venía siendo antes. Yo creo que para entender el memento actual del desarrollo turístico a nivel global, hay que situarnos en dos crisis:

ya antes mencionamos el programa neoliberal y como el neoliberalismo incorpora el turismo con un mecanismo de expansión por al mismo tiempo de estabilización. Pero las dos últimas crisis la de 2008 y 2020 generan un salto de escala en términos de turistificación, un proceso turistificación global como nunca habíamos vivido, siendo un salto exponencial, en parte porque después de la crisis de 2008 se produce una situación en la cual las vías que habían optado a través de los préstamos [00:24:00] bancarios, la construcción, hipotecas, etcétera, colapsa y no es posible seguir reproduciendo el capital a través de esas vías. Y esto necesita encontrar otros mecanismos a traves de los cuales el capital se puede reproducir. Ahí, david Harvey ha hablado muchas veces de la importancia que tiene la urbanización de China en este proceso de salida de la crisis de 2008.

Nosotros entendemos que, además de esto, el papel del turismo es clave. No es casualidad que una empresa como Airbnb nazca en 2008, que se produzca esta expansión del turismo urbano. Es decir, tiene que ver con esta lógica. Y la pandemia de alguna manera lo que hace es detener, pero al mismo tiempo, una salida, una reacción de los capitales muy agresiva por recuperar lo que no han ganado en los años anteriores.

Y por tanto, se produce como una vuelta de tuerca más en esta dinámica.

En este punto, para eso no es útil el pensamiento de Jason Moore, que yo lo leo fundamentalmente [00:25:00] como aportación de Iván Murray en esta obra que hacemos, en el malestar de la turistificación. Esta hipótesis del fin del turismo barato que planteamos a partir de la relectura de Jason Moore, lo que nos permite pensar es, o interpretar más bien , la dinámica de redituación es igual que la anterior a la crisis o hay algo cualitativamente distinto? Y hay algo cualitativamente distinto, porque estamos ante un escenario de riesgo para este desarrollo capitalista vinculado a las naturalezas baratas.

Y ahí es donde nos damos cuenta que, en parte hay un efecto champagne, que cerca las reactuaciones no has podido viajar durante dos años y cuando hay la apertura, la gente sale. Pero más allá de esto y que nos expresa en estos últimos años de una forma desmesurada de tenemos turismo en los destinos más purificados, turismo de todo tipo, desde lujo a despedidas de [00:26:00] soltero o de soltero, que no alquilan ni una habitación, que sencillamente pasan de noche el viernes y el sábado de fiesta y se va en el domingo y ya está. O sea, tenemos de todo.

Y ahí es donde recupero a Jason Moore y la ideas del fin de las del turismo barato, este riesgo de fin de turismo barato, lo que nos empezamos a dar cuenta es que empieza a ver una mayor competencia entre territorios, entre ciudades, por atraer un turismo de mayor poder adquisitivo. Se dan cuenta que hemos salido de la crisis y hay una serie de emergencias crónicas o lo que algunos le llaman policrisis que siguen estando presentes, que tienen que ver con el cambio climático, con la crisis de combustibles o la crisis energética y la crisis de materiales con las interrupciones a las cadenas globales de suministros, con las tensiones geopolíticas.

Y todo esto nos ponen alerta de los riesgos que tiene el [00:27:00] desarrollo turístico. Si estamos en un escenario muy vulnerable. Además, después de la salida, empezamos a ver que hay un nivel de destrucción de los ecosistemas enorme, que no decir, esta lógica de crecimiento constante es inviable, porque hemos superado con mucho la capacidad del planeta y en ese contexto también vemos otro naturaleza barata que empieza a ser cuestionada, que es el trabajo, es decir la idea de la renuncia, de la dimisión, y uno de los grandes problemas que tienen las empresas en estos momentos es la falta de personal, gente que no quiere trabajar ahí y que busca trabajo en otros sitios.

Entonces, en ese contexto que llamamos de emergencias crónicas que además se retroalimentan unas con otras, lo que empezamos a ver es que los capitales, a través de las autoridades públicas en distintos territorios, empiezan a competir por atraer un turista de mayor poder adquisitivo. Buscan cómo concentrar esa franja de segmento [00:28:00] turístico que va a ser menos sensibles a situaciones de crisis, que va a seguir viajando y cómo traerlo.

Y implica un programa de gasto público enorme en términos de infraestructuras para traerlos en términos de promoción internacional, términos de macro-eventos para consolidar esa atracción. El problema es que, por definición, los turistas de mayor poder adquisitivo son mucho menos que la clase media o las clases trabajadoras en las que se ha sentado el turismo en las últimas décadas.

Y por tanto, esa competencia entre territorios, por atraer ese segmento turístico de mayor poder adquisitivo, se incrementan. Es una competencia feroz por atraer a ese tipo de turistas y yo creo que estamos en este en este contexto. Y yo creo que no nos hubiéramos dado cuenta si una de las hipótesis posibles que formulamos a partir del libro en Malestar en la Turistificación no fuera precisamente esta [00:29:00] idea que extraemos de Jason Moore sobre el fin de las naturalezas baratas.

La otra hipótesis tiene que ver con el trabajo que desarrolla a partir de Erik Ollin Wright sobre las posibilidades y cómo de transformar el sistema capitalista, hablando también desde el turismo, que es algo que Erik Ollin Wright nunca hizo, pero no sé si querías que habláramos ahora de él o o como quieres que lo planteemos.

Chris: Pues sí, sí, me encantaría si podrías platicar un poco sobre Erik Ollin Wright, porque escogiste el específicamente, pero también para empezar, porque el capítulo que escribiste está titulado como un Turismo Postcapitalista: Siguiendo Los Pasos de Erik Ollin Wright.

Entonces, antes de meternos en sus obras y su trabajo me gustaría preguntarte, pues, cómo defines Postcapitalismo?

Ernest: Yo parto un posicionamiento anticapitalista. Y no tengo ninguna duda. Si me [00:30:00] opongo a a este modelo de producción, creo que nos lleva el desastre tanto en términos humanos como planetarios. Desde esa posición de esa convicción anticapitalista, lo que plantea es la necesidad de encontrar salidas que nos lleven a otro escenario.

Podríamos llamarle socialismo. Podríamos llamarle ecosocialismo. No lo sé. Me interesa más pensar la posibilidad de pensar horizontes que escapen del capitalismo. Este es el posicionamiento. A veces hay gente que duda, porque una cosa o la otra. No una cosa o la otra. Si partimos del anticapitalismo para intentar construir algo fuera del capitalismo, pero no es algo tampoco mecánico, es algo que construimos. No es una fase superior del capitalismo. Después del capitalismo podría ser formas de violencia y de explotación mucho mayores. Es algo que tenemos que construir. Entonces, la idea es no resistimos, confrontamos con las lógicas capitalistas y desde [00:31:00] intentamos construir algo distinto, algo que podemos llamarle metafóricamente del momento postcapitalismo, pero no es contradictorio una posición con la otra.

A partir de ahí, yo, sinceramente, estoy en este camino de buscar como pensar las posibilidades de transformación. Esto lo tenía claro. Y cuando me acerco a distintos autores, Erik Ollin Wright no era un autor que me resultaba especialmente simpático. Venía de una tradición socialdemócrata. Venía del marxismo analítico, que era algo que no especialmente me seducía.

Si me interesaba una cosa especialmente de su obra, que era el rigor metodológico en las formas de analizar la sociedad. Esto me a atrevía especialmente. Es decir, salir fuera de las metáforas y del lenguaje a veces tan obtuso del marxismo y empezar a construir utilizando las mejores herramientas de las que disponemos en un determinado memento desde las ciencias [00:32:00] sociales.

Esto reconozco que era algo que sí que me atraía, pero no es necesariamente todo el pensamiento de Erik Ollin Wright y Erik Ollin Wright me interesa partir de leer Utopía Reales y después Como Ser Anticapitalista en el Siglo XXI, por la visión que tiene. El lo que hace es un intento de recuperar distintas tradiciones de la izquierda para pensar un programa de acción complementario.

Y a mi, esta idea me seduce especialmente, cómo pensamos en términos complementarios. Es decir cómo la acción de uno es la que uno puede hacer, la que uno desea hacer o la que las condiciones le han marcado, pero no son mejores ni peores que las que hace el otro compañero que está desde otra trinchera y como dejamos de competir por cuál es la mejor idea y empezamos a reconocernos que unos están intentando transformaciones desde el ámbito, de la lucha política parlamentaria, otros lo hacen desde del mundo sindical, otros desde del mundo [00:33:00] ecologistas y otros de cooperativismo. Reintegrar, repensar conjuntamente esas distintas tradiciones de acción de la izquierda.

Me parecía que era algo necesario. Discrepo en una posición de Erik Ollin Wright que no acabo compartir, que es esta idea de negar la posibilidad de la revolución. Y me explico, Erik Ollin Wright dice en parte como buen social demócrata, lo que viene a decir es, después de las experiencias históricas, es fácilmente reconocible que cuando hemos tomado el poder después de un proceso revolucionario, las dinámicas que hemos generado después casi han sido peores que contra lo que combatíamos. Y probablemente tenga razón.

Y yo he vivido 11 años en Nicaragua y sé de lo que estoy hablando. Se de qué significa los supuestos nuestros cuando están en el poder. Entonces, cuidado con esta idea, la simple toma del poder en [00:34:00] nombre de una bandera, de una determinada cristalización ideológica es ya un futuro deseable y mejor. Cuidado porque efectivamente generamos monstruos peores.

Pero lo que discrepo con Erik Ollin Wright es que, si bien, en sí misma la toma del poder no te garantiza una sociedad ni mucho más justa, ni mucho más equitativa, sino que al final, muchas veces lo que te encuentras son dinámicas de estabilización de nuevos grupos que ascienden al poder y desde ahí ejercen el control.

Pero lo que sí, quiero que no podemos renunciar a la idea de la movilización social, incluso de la toma del poder político como un mecanismo defensivo, como un mecanismo de respuesta ante el desorden que genera el capitalismo. En estos contextos, aunque fuera para salvaguardar dinámicas democráticas, aunque fuera para salvaguardar, creo que no podemos renunciar a la herramienta [00:35:00] revolución, pensado probablemente en términos defensivos no ofensivos, si no pensando que vamos a cambiar y vamos a generar un mundo mejor a partir de la toma del poder inmediata. Pero sí, salvaguardarlo como un mecanismo defensivo ante la lógica del avance del desorden que genera el capitalismo, la posibilidad de restaurar ciertos equilibrios a través de procesos revolucionarios.

Creo que esta es la idea que recuperamos de Walter Benjamin cuando dicen que a veces se marca como la revolución, como la locomotora de la historia y el dice más bien, es el freno de mano. Es decir, es ante el despeñadero pensar en esto. Bueno, esto mi distancia de esta posición tan categórica de Erik Ollin Wright, pero en cambio, me parece interesante cómo construir una posibilidad de un mundo post capitalista a partir de cuatro grandes estrategias o vías de lo que ella denomina erosión del [00:36:00] capitalismo. O sea si no es posible darle la vuelta de inmediato, probablemente habrá que pensar en un tránsito a largo plazo en el cual este orden capitalista he agujereado desde distintos ámbitos de intervención y fundamentalmente desde el estado y desde fuera del estado.

Y él plantea esta idea del desmantelar, domesticar, huir y resistir como formas de intervención. Y yo lo que hago en el capítulo es subir, bueno, si el turismo es tan importante en el capitalismo, cómo podríamos pensar estas categorías, estas dinámicas de ejes de intervención que contribuyen a erosionar el capitalismo de ir agujereándolo, de ir creando nuevas lógicas, aunque sean frágiles, aunque sean temporales, pero como mostrar, y como de algún modo ir asentando y que iba creciendo áreas de funcionamiento social que no reproducen las lógicas del capitalismo, sino que [00:37:00] avancen en otras direcciones. Y esto en un largo proceso que nos vaya avanzando, que nos permite avanzar.

Y yo lo que intento hacer es cómo podría ser esto desde el turismo? Y ahí implica, por una parte, la intervención desde el estado, es decir por un lado, desde el estado, entendiendo al estado cómo la cristalización de una determinada correlación de fuerzas en un determinado memento. Podríamos pensarlo en términos de, bueno, es la reproducción de, es el mecanismo que tienen las clases dominantes para reproducir bien. Yo quiero más bien siguiendo otros autores de la tradicion marxista, como Poblanzas y otros más bien entendiendo como una cristalización de una determinada correlación de fuerzas. Y esto puede cambiar.

Bien, desde esa perspectiva, pensar como desde el estado, podemos intervenir abriendo dinámicas que funcionen fuera de las lógicas del capitalismo. Una de ellas que no significa que sean necesariamente anticapitalistas, que a veces ayudan a [00:38:00] estabilizar el mismo capitalismo, pero pueden ser leídas de múltiples maneras.

Una de ellas tiene que ver con esta idea de ponerle límites al capital, introduciendo mecanismos de control, de regulación, de fiscalidad. Es decir desde la inspección del trabajo hasta la fiscalidad hasta las tonificaciones en determinadas ciudades de qué se puede hacer, si podemos permitir más hoteles o no podemos permitirlos, cierto?

Todo esta dimensión de "desde el estado," cómo ponemos mecanismos de limitación y contención al desarrollo de capital turístico? Otra vía, otra estrategias, como desde el mismo estado, generamos igual que por ejemplo, hemos hecho en algunos países en el ámbito de la salud o en el ámbito de la educación, cómo establecemos programas públicos que garanticen el acceso a las vacaciones, al descanso, etc. de una parte de la población, con programas de turismo social, [00:39:00] con creación de infraestructuras, desde parques urbanos a mejora transporte público, acompañamiento los programas de la economía social y solidaria, el cooperativismo.

Es decir cómo desde el estado generamos dinámicas que contribuían a garantizar el acceso de los sectores más desfavorecidos a vacaciones. La tercer eje de intervención de que plantea Erik Ollin Wright tiene que ver con la idea de resistir resistir fuera del estado, es decir, resistir en el combate a este desorden que genera el capitalismo, el capital turístico.

Y esto implica resistir desde dentro de las empresas con las organizaciones sindicales, pero tremendas de fuera desde los movimientos comunitarios, ecologistas, vecinales, es decir, ponerle límites al capital, no solamente esperando lo que va a hacer el estado con políticas públicas, sino que hacemos de forma organizada colectivamente dentro y fuera de las empresas.[00:40:00]

Y la cuarta dimensión de esta proceso de entender mecanismos de erosión del capitalismo y en este caso, del capitalismo de base turística, sería la idea de huir. Hay que salir ya hoy y aquí de este mundo capitalista. Y esto implica crear cooperativas, ensayar formas de organización distinta que nos permitan garantizar vacaciones, descanso, formas diversas de construir el ocio que pueden incluir el desplazamiento.

Y esto podemos hacerlo fundamentalmente desde las organizaciones comunitarias, desde el ámbito de las cooperativas, pero también desde fuera del mercado. Es decir, si la tutela del estado y si la tutela del mercado. Es decir, reorganización del ocio popular sin pasar por el mercado. Esto que en algunos países llamamos domingueros, dominguiar, hacer uso del día del señor para [00:41:00] descansar o tocarnos las narices o leer debajo un árbol.

Es esta idea de hacer lo que queramos de forma autoorganizada, en colectivo o individualmente. Es decir, abrir estos espacios. Entonces yo creo que estas cuatro dimensiones es lo que nos permite pensar la posibilidad de una transformación del turismo bajo otras lógicas. Y aquí creo que hay que introducir un matiz porque a veces siento que hay una cierta confusión, como si todo fuera un problema de palabras. Es decir que nos negamos a utilizar la palabra turismo porque es una palabra que es capital.

Bueno, nosotros, lo que reivindicamos fundamentalmente es el tiempo libre, el tiempo liberado del trabajo. Esto es lo que nosotros reivindicamos. Y creo que eso es lo que tenemos derecho a el tiempo que liberamos del trabajo para poder hacer lo que necesitemos en términos de descanso, de alimento de nuestro pensamiento, de goce, de desarrollo, de posibilidades.[00:42:00]

Esto es lo que nos interesa. Y esto se puede organizar en el propio lugar de residencia en tu espacio próximo de residencia en términos de ocio, de entretenimiento, de recreación. Pero si implica desplazamiento, es cuando empezamos a hablar de turismo y este turismo, podemos organizarlo que implica ocio más desplazamiento.

Esto podemos organizarlo, que es como hemos hecho hasta ahora, bajo las lógicas del capitalismo para reproducir el capital o podemos organizar este ocio con desplazamiento para satisfacer necesidades humanas. Y ahí es donde creo que tenemos el centro de la propuesta. Es decir, cómo pensar que una práctica humana, una práctica social no pueda ser solamente definida por las lógicas de reproducción del capital, sino que tenemos que poder desarrollarla bajo otras lógicas. Y esta es la reivindicación.

Es decir, no resignarnos a que solamente el [00:43:00] capital organice nuestras vidas. Hay una frase de David Harvey que tiene toda la razón cuando dice no hay ninguna idea moralmente buena que el capitalismo no pueda compartir en algo horroroso.

Y tiene toda la razón. El capitalismo tiene la capacidad para hacer esto, pero nosotros también pensamos que al mismo tiempo, no hay ninguna práctica social que no podamos organizar bajo otras lógicas distintas a las del capitalismo, que un mundo socialista, un mundo ecosocialista, podría ser organizado bajo otras lógicas y eso tiene que empezar ya ahora y aquí. No esperar a que venga una revolución y no sabemos cómo saldremos de ésa, sino que tenemos que empezar a organizarlo ya ahora y aquí. Yo creo que esta es la segunda hipótesis con la que construimos a partir de este libro del Malestar en la Turistificacion, que creo que, como mínimo a mí, hay muchísimas más lecturas del libro.

Pero a [00:44:00] mí esta idea que extraemos de Jason Moore en torno al fin del turismo barato y la disyuntiva entre elitizacion o empezamos a pensar propuestas de transformación que den respuesta a las necesidades de la mayoría social, esta segunda hipótesis es lo que creo que sale con más fuerza de este libro. O como mínimo es mi lectura.

Estoy seguro que otras compañeras y otros compañeros han hecho otras lecturas del del libro y les está estimulando para hacer otras cosas. Y creo que esa es la potencia que tiene el libro, que es empezar a robustecer el pensamiento crítico en turismo con abriendo nosotros posibilidades.

Chris: Mm-hmm. Wow,

Gracias, Ernest. Este yo creo que para mucho de nosotros, más ustedes que tiene mucho más tiempo en las investigaciones, los límites o el límite es la palabra, es el concepto [00:45:00] central de cómo podemos pensar, distintamente cuando estabas hablando de esas cosas, yo pensé, casi no hay límites a los instituciones que tenemos en el mundo capitalista moderna, solo los límites que los instituciones ponen en uno mismo. Pero luego tenemos que invertir lo que está pasando en el sentido de poner límites en las instituciones y luego poner en pausa las límites que son impuestos a nuestras lógicas, nuestras capacidades o maneras de pensar el mundo, de entender al mundo, pero también de pensar de otros mundos.

Y entonces, poner un límite en cuántas vuelos puede llegar en un lugar en un día o cuántos hoteles podemos construir, etcétera. Cuántos turistas podemos tener? Pero al final cuando yo pienso en eso, a veces pienso como los pueblos en México y Oaxaca en donde vivo que algunos son pueblos ecoturísticos y tienen economías relativamente cerradas o relativamente mucho más [00:46:00] cerradas que las ciudades y eso y que tienen la capacidad, que si se hacen, se ponen los límites y se dice vamos a aceptar toda x cantidad de gente en este año porque entendemos que Los recursos o la naturaleza alrededor va a sufrir sino. Pero también se este. Hay otras preguntas, eh, como de la influencia social, el intercambio de capital entre gente de culturas distintas que viene con expectativas.

Pero entonces quizás empezamos con la la cuestión de resistencia, porque a México, como muchos otros países que dependen en gran medida de las economías turísticas, las formas de resistencia política, no todas, pero algunas sí, que se emprenden contra esas economías a menudo apuntan a los turistas como los principales beneficiarios o cupables. Parece haber una fuerte resistencia a nombrar a la población local como dependiente y defensora de estas [00:47:00] economías. Si vamos a construir una resistencia política que abarque las necesidades económicas de todas las personas dentro de un lugar, cómo podemos ir más allá de esta crítica, yo digo superficial, que tiene la capacidad de esencializar a los extranjeros y infantalizar a los locales.

Ernest: Yo creo que, bueno, has dicho un montón de cosas que me sugieren en reacción. Ah, pero para empezar por el final, yo diría que muchas veces nos encontramos con formas des legitimación de las protestas diciendo bueno, todos somos turistas, como si tuviéramos que tener un comportamiento virtuoso, decir apelando una cierta coherencia individual en todos nuestros comportamientos.

De hecho, lo que están haciendo con este tipo de críticas, es sencillamente negar la legitimidad de las reivindicaciones, decir, señalando la contradicción como si todo fuera un problema individual [00:48:00] de comportamientos individuales. Y cuando lo que nos estamos diciendo es esto es un problema político, no de una persona en concreto, sea turista o sea población local que resiste y luego hace turismo, si el problema dejémonos ya de moralismo y de buscar ciudadanos virtuosos moralmente. Y empecemos a plantear que ambas son las estructuras políticas que pongan límites a este capital turístico. Yo creo que el grueso de la pelea es salir de esta idea de la responsabilidad individual de quedar atrapados en estas ideas de responsabilidad que tampoco sin desmerecerla, es decir es otro campo de intervención, pero el centro no puede ser la decisión individual y la coherencia individual en relación a nuestros comportamientos. Tiene que ver con dinámicas estructurales y lo que hay que cambiar son dinámicas de conjunto y para eso se falta hacer política con mayúsculas, ,implica movilización, pero para [00:49:00] cambiar estructuras.

Cuál es el problema que a veces en esta maraña de capitales, que haces más difícil de identificar quién es el responsable de estas políticas o de estas violencias? Si quienes al final del último, que toma decisiones detrás de estos fondos de inversión. En cambio, el turista lo tenemos cerca y puede ser efectivamente blanco del malestar, porque es el que tienes más cerca. Entonces, y yo creo que desde los medios de comunicación, se nos intenta situar en ese terreno, a cuando se pone en circulación la idea de turismofobia, que empieza sobre todo en Barcelona y que luego circula a nivel internacional.

Es una campaña dirigida a quitar la legitimación al movimiento vecinal que está protestando. No hay turismofobia. Puede haber alguien que de un día te caiga mal a alguien, pero no es un problema contra una persona. Lo que pasa es que a veces al que tienes cerca, el que te molesta es el turista, [00:50:00] es la parte final de ese proceso y es mucho más difícil señalar a las autoridades públicas, locales, nacionales, internacionales que han diseñado esos marcos de representación, a las empresas escondidas en esas dinámicas financieras.

Entonces yo creo que es un proceso contradictorio, pero que, al mismo tiempo, no debemos renunciar a él. Es decir, aquí la cuestión no tiene que ver con como eres más o menos coherente, más o menos responsable, siendo población local, receptora o siendo turista o siendo muchas cosas a la vez. No tiene tanto que ver con eso, sino como reorganizamos el sistema de organizar el sistema turístico.

Esta es la clave. Aquí está el problema. Y esto implica ponerle límites. Y como bien decías en tu primera parte, la intervención, si yo creo que la palabra límites adquirido, una connotación política fundamental. Las últimas manifestaciones que se están organizando [00:51:00] en España, en la que tuvimos hace dos, dos fines de semana en Barcelona, o la que va a ver este domingo en Palma, especialmente pongámosle límites al turismo.

Pero esta demanda de ponerle límites y al mismo tiempo que le ponemos límites, tenemos que saber que hay una parte de la población que en España es de un 30 porciento, pero que la Union Europea gira en torno también otro 30% con niveles también muy desiguales, pero que cuando lo miramos desde América Latina, es mucho más, más de la mitad de la población que no puede hacer vacaciones. Es decir que estamos en esa discusión pero por otra parte, tenemos una parte de la población que no tiene infraestructuras que le permiten hacer vacaciones, sea desde que legalmente, no le permiten tener esas vacaciones en buenas condiciones, que no hay infraestructuras para que puedan pagárselas, que faltan programas públicos de calidad de turismo social que le [00:52:00] permitan disponer de esas infraestructuras.

Entonces, yo creo que la dinámica es doble, es por uno de que ponerle límites al capital. Y hay que hacerlo como parte de una reflexión y de una intervención política no individual en términos morales, pero que al mismo tiempo, hay que plantear un horizonte de deseo. Queremos algo, queremos disfrutar del tiempo libre.

Queremos disfrutar de un tiempo libre de calidad. Una de las formas posibles, no la única puede ser el turismo, que implicar este ocio más desplazamiento. Y para hacer esto y poder gozar de conocer otros espacios, otros lugares fuera de mi realidad cotidiana. Para hacer esto, necesitamos infraestructuras sociales que nos permiten hacerlo.

Y yo creo que ahí está la batalla, por un lado, ponerle límites al capital y por otro lado, expandirnos. Ofreciendo un mundo deseable. Queremos disponer de tiempo libre. [00:53:00] Queremos desarrollarnos en nuestro tiempo libre. Queremos que nuestro tiempo libre lo podamos organizar en la proximidad en nuestra casa, en nuestros alrededores, pero puntualmente también viajando.

Y eso significa disponer de infraestructuras públicas y también de mecanismos porque el dinero y el mercado va a ser la única forma de decidir quien vuela y quien no vuela. Si tenemos que ir un mundo con muchos menos vuelos, serán los que puedan pagarlos o podemos organizarlo de otro modo.

Cuántas veces puedes volar al año? Cuántas veces puedes hacer por cuánto tiempo? Como podemos, si le imp, implica un un ejercicio que a veces, cuando lo planteas, parece que esta gente no vive en el mundo, que la realidad es otra efectivamente. Ocurre esto, pero para avanzar en esta dirección, necesitamos horizontes de esperanza, horizontes que nos digan debemos ir para allá, no solamente como pérdida de privilegios, no [00:54:00] solamente por restringirnos porque el planeta se desmonta, sino porque queremos vivir mejor y queremos vivir mejor todos.

Entonces, yo creo que esta conjunción, porque si no tenemos otro problema que tiene que ver con el crecimiento de la extrema derecha en un mundo de inseguridades en un mundo de amenazas, quién está ofreciendo seguridades, aunque sea con discursos racistas xenófobos de culpar al penúltimo, culpando al último.

Es decir en este contexto, cómo podemos organizar dinámicas que a la vez que le ponemos límites a este desarrollo turístico capitalista, estemos ofreciendo seguridades, seguridades en términos de el control implica también mejores de condiciones de trabajo. Y el control sobre esto es también para poder organizar el turismo de otra manera que tú no pierdas tu trabajo, sino que podamos organizarlo de otra manera y que podamos satisfacer las necesidades [00:55:00] que tiene mucha más gente.

Yo creo que la cosa va por ahí entre la resistencia y la propuesta de un mundo deseable también en el turismo.

Chris: Ya ya igual subió mi mente como esa noción de el ocio, el tiempo de ocio son momentos también fuera de trabajo que en un análisis puede decir que el trabajo es un tipo de esclavitud moderna, a veces no, pero a veces sí, muchas veces creo y que tiempo de ocio o descanso es un tiempo también para organizarse.

Organizar la comunidad. Organizar por otros mundos o contra lo que tienes, eh? Pero el turismo parece que también ha sido como un herramienta contra eso. O sea, ya tienes tu tiempo descanso. Pero mira, mira, mira las playas de Cuba...

Ernest: No es exclusivo del turismo. Es decir, cuando hablamos de turismo, estamos hablando de ocio, más desplazamiento. [00:56:00] Si no nos desplazamos, resulta que este ocio que hacemos desde nuestra casa es el mas emancipatorio del mundo. Es decir, estar en casa viendo Netflix es lo mejor, estar yendo al centro comercial a pasear porque hubiese en un mundo de inseguridades de mierda.

Es decir, en este contexto, esto no es algo exclusivo del turismo. También desde el ocio, tenemos estas dinámicas de alineación y de mercantilizacion. Entonces, necesitamos salir de las palabras para construir escenarios que nos permitan satisfacer necesidades y expandir posibilidades, capacidades de la gente de explorar y vivir mejor.

Pero hay muchos ejemplos que te permiten de manera diversa y es parte de lo que decíamos al principio de la conversación de en lo que estamos trabajando en Alba Sud de intentarse sistematizar un montón de estas experiencias que han [00:57:00] probado aspectos distintos de transformación, de salir de estas lógicas y avanzar en otras direcciones.

Y quiero que el problema es que muchas veces la academia no ha puesto atención en estas posibilidades. Y en cambio, en la vida, en la vida cotidiana, hay muchas más cosas que se están haciendo que no hace falta que nos pongamos a inventar que también, pero empecemos también por reconocer y recuperar muchas de las cosas que están en nuestra propia historia y también en nuestro alrededor, en en estos otros contextos que podemos encontrar experiencias ricas en estas otras formas y las encontraremos en el ocio y las encontraremos en el turismo.

Pero a veces tengo la sensación de que cuando solamente identificábamos el turismo como un proceso de mercantilizacion, nos estamos pegando un tiro al pie. El turismo, igual que muchas otras cosas, puede ser eso y efectivamente es una dinámica de reproducción del capital que [00:58:00] genera violencia, violencia estructural y directa.

Nos tenemos que resignar a que solamente pueda ser eso. Podríamos imaginar cómo construimos eso de otra manera y para imaginar, empecemos por reconocer lo que está en otro alrededor que ya está funcionando de otras maneras y que a lo mejor algunas de estas experiencias son frágiles, son limitadas, tienen contradicciones, fracasan, pero muestran que durante un tiempo ha sido posible organizar esto.

La próxima fracasaremos mejor. Y a la siguiente, lo haremos perfecto. Es decir, es un proceso constante de tensión, de organización, de intento de generar cambios que nos permitan construir una vida digna, que también pasa por recuperar ese tiempo libre que lo podremos organizar de maneras distintas. Y ahí podríamos o no incluir el turismo en función de nuestras necesidades y posibilidades.

Chris: Gracias, Ernest. Gracias por ofrecer eso y [00:59:00] clarificar. Entonces, si podemos imaginar otros mundos, otras formas de caminar y caminar juntos, podemos comenzar a dar pasos hacia esos caminos. Si pudieras imaginar un otro mundo de esa manera, libre de las limitaciones contemporáneas de las fronteras estatales, la hospitalidad industrial y las expectativas extractivas cómo sería para ti, Ernest?

Ese viaje que tanto deseas hacer sería una peregrinación? Sería posible solo una vez en tu vida? Cómo sería ese viaje para ti?

Ernest: Claro, yo diferenciaría y pensaría en que necesariamente sea plural. Es decir, que las opciones sean múltiples. No hay una respuesta, no hay una forma de organizar otro turismo. Hay o deben haber muchas formas. En función de las muchas necesidades que tenga la gente. El otro día, en una entrevista, a preguntar cómo hacías vacaciones tú cuando eras adolescente? Como pensando en [01:00:00] cómo encontrar ese anexo en lo que ahora me preocupa y yo digo, lo que hacía era pasarme en los veranos en la biblioteca.

Y lo que deseaba era tener infraestructuras públicas de calidad en la que pudieras leer sin ruido, constantemente. Y quería infraestructuras públicas que me permitieran hacer eso. Y creo que una forma de organizar tu tiempo libre tiene que ver con que dispongamos de infraestructuras públicas que nos permitan organizarlo.

Y ahí, no hay una sola forma, ni una sola necesidad. La mía tiene que ver con esto o ha tenido que ver con esto en un determinado momento de mi vida y para otros es otra y para otros es una distinta. Entonces yo me imagino no un camino, sino me imagino unos muchos caminos que pueden responder a formas y necesidades distintas.

Si me imagino programas robustos potentes de calidad de turismo social en el que [01:01:00] la gente pueda acceder al mar, puede acceder a la montaña, puede acceder a espacios que en la cercanía y tomando en cuenta a los límites del planeta, podamos movilizarnos masivamente para dormir fuera de nuestra casa, viendo las experiencias, pero que no solamente en infraestructuras o espacios natural, sino que también implique un programa pedagógico pensado para cómo desarrollar potencialidades, como ver esas distintas apuestas.

Pero veo esto y también veo con deseo, las apropiaciones que hace a la gente los parques públicos, como la gente se toma al parque y celebra fiestas y organiza actividades. Creo que necesitamos pensar en términos plurales. Es decir no hay unas vacaciones. A lo mejor en la vida, necesitaremos tener disponer de la posibilidad de organizar nuestros tiempos de trabajo de manera distinta, que nos permitan viajar más tiempo que en lugar de hacer lo que no tendría [01:02:00] sentido es pensar que podemos universalizar viajes de Alemania al Caribe por cuatro días.

Eso no tiene ningún sentido, pero estamos seguros de que ya no podremos conocer otros territorios. A lo mejor será menos veces en la vida. Será por más tiempo. Será combinando trabajo con espacios de ocio con espacios. Es decir, creo que lo que debemos abrirnos es a la pluralidad de posibilidades de organizar esta parte de nuestro tiempo libre que hemos asociado con el desplazamiento.

De alguna manera, yo creo que lo que necesitamos son horizontes por los que merezca la pena, no solamente resistir, sino movilizarse para avanzar hacia ellos. Queremos vivir mejor y tenemos derecho a vivir mejor. Tenemos que resistir todas las mierdas y todas las cabronadas que nos hace el capital. Pero al mismo tiempo, tenemos que poder aspirar a una [01:03:00] vida organizada bajo otras lógicas. Ahí es donde creo que que está la clave algo por lo que merezca la pena luchar.

Chris: Gracias, Ernest por esas palabras muy importantes y tus reflexiones en el día dehoy, desde mí, mi parte y mi corazón y la parte de los oyentes también. Entonces, por último, Ernest, cómo podrían nuestros oyentes saber más sobre tu trabajo y Alba Sud y donde se pueden comprar el Malestar en la Turistificacion?

Ernest: Al bas sud?

Tenemos nuestra página web AlbaSud.Org. Ahí, todas nuestras publicaciones son de descarga gratuita. Tenemos una sección de formación en la que vamos recuperando todos los videos de los debates actividades que organizamos. Si la página web, la herramienta. Disponemos de un boletín que mandamos mensualmente.

Estamos en redes [01:04:00] sociales varias, en Facebook, en Twitter, en Linkedin, disponemos de un canal en Telegram. Por ahí se pueden informar de lo que hacemos, de las actividades de las convocatorias y con Icaria que tenemos varios libros publicados, dependiendo del lugar en España, es posible en cualquier librería.

Si no lo tienen, pedirlo y lo llevan. Y en muchos otros lugares, creo que hay que pedirlo directamente por la editorial. Es decir, en algunos países de América Latina, Icaria tiene distribución comercial normal. En otros es más difícil, pero en la página web de Icaria Editorial se pueden conseguir estos trabajos. Y si no lo encuentran, que nos escriban que algo resolveremos.

Chris: Muy bien, pues voy a asegurar que todos esos enlaces están ya en el sitio de Fin de Turismo cuando lanza el episodio y una vez más Ernest, desee que tendríamos más tiempo para [01:05:00] platicar, pero seguramente en otra ocasión. Fue un gran honor, oportunidad de hablar contigo y espero que podemos hacerlo de nuevo en algún momento.

Ernest: Con mucho gusto. Encantado de poder conversar contigo. Y estoy realmente seguro de que vamos a continuar caminando juntos. Muchas gracias.

Leave a comment

Subscribe now

English Transcription

Chris: [00:00:00] Welcome Ernest, to the end of tourism podcast.

Ernest: Thank you very much. It's a pleasure to be here.

Chris: It's a great honor to finally be able to talk to you. I wonder if, to start with, you could tell us about this, where you speak today and what the world is like there for you?

Ernest: I usually live in Barcelona, between Barcelona and Mallorca, because I am between the University of the Balearic Islands and Alba Sud, and at the moment I am in Buenos Aires working on research into different management experiences, outside the logic of capitalism. And this led us to identify different experiences. And now I am starting a research with the Hotel Bauen, what was the now closed Hotel Bauen and the cooperative that managed it for 20 years,

It is part of the process that we are doing, identifying [00:01:00] diverse plural experiences that have to do with how to think about the possibility of organizing tourism under other modes and this has taken us along different paths from Latin America, from Spain. And now I am here.

Chris: Well, thank you Ernest. And yes, we are going to talk about this topic, but beyond the visions that exist, that we can imagine about post - capitalist tourism or something around it, something like that. But before we get into that, you and I have been in contact for the last two years, partly due to your work in the field of critical tourism studies and your Alba Sud project, in which some of our previous guests, including Ivan Murray, Robert Fletcher and Macia Blasquez, have participated.

I would love for you to tell me a little bit [00:02:00] about Alba Sud, Ernest, its mission, its history and its current situation.

Ernest: With pleasure. Oh, look, Alba Sud was founded in 2008. We had legalized it before in case some group of colleagues needed it one day, but it formally began to operate in 2008 and it began to operate in Managua, Nicaragua, which was where I lived at the time.

And it was basically an agreement between people who were dedicated to research and communication to work with critical and at the same time propositional analysis around tourism. This was something that was original from the beginning, this double concern, about how to think about the impacts, the effects that tourism development had under capitalism and what kind of dynamics of structural and direct violence they generated and at the same time, how to think about possibilities of getting out of that [00:03:00] framework of those logics. And that was a hallmark that we started with from the beginning.

Over the years, Alba Sud has grown, becoming a network of tourism researchers. We now have a presence in 10 countries in Spain, France, Europe, and then in Latin America, in the Dominican Republic, Mexico, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Costa Rica, Brazil, Uruguay and Argentina.

So it is a network made up of people who are dedicated to different areas of tourism analysis and who share work spaces and analysis and political intervention. For us, Alba Sud is a research centre, but it is not an academic centre and we are less concerned about academic dynamics, although there is a part of our team of people who collaborate who are at the university, different universities.

What we are concerned about is how to generate [00:04:00] knowledge that is useful for communities, for community organizations, for civil associations, for unions, and for public administration when possible. That is, we try to generate knowledge, analysis, systematization, proposals that in some way contribute to making visible the things that do not work well, that are a disaster that generate pain in this world in relation to tourism and at the same time, to think of horizons of hope.

This is the purpose. To do this, we have a large team of people who collaborate more closely on a day-to-day basis, others who collaborate occasionally, and we basically put together our work, which is organized around a website, www.AlbaSud.Org, and we structure it into research papers that are later published in a format [00:05:00] written in different ways, which I will then tell you about. In addition to the form of research, work is linked to training to generate dialogue processes that allow us to listen, to reflect together, putting people who come from the academy on the same level as people who have specific work experiences. And finally, a more political influence area, more of accompanying organizations and accompanying them to influence politically.

In the field of research, we then express it, basically through short articles that we write, we publish around 100, 110, 120 a year, which are short articles of 2000-2500 words, which we know are widely used in universities, as discussion material.

And a bit of the purpose is this, that they are boiled down as small, well-written articles, or we try to make them well [00:06:00] written, that they are in simple language, that the complexity has nothing to do with the academic swear words that we use, but the depth of the thought that they incorporate, but that they have to be able to be read by many people.

We have this. Then, we started our own publishing house, Alba Sud Editorial, in which we have a collection of books, a collection of reports and recently a collection of policy briefs aimed more at policy recommendations. And basically Alba Sud is that. It is a meeting space between people who do not resign ourselves to thinking that tourism development necessarily has to involve this, who are supporting the resistance, the struggles against the many evils and violence generated by this capitalist development through tourism and who at the same time, try to build what I said before "horizons of hope" that allow us to stimulate struggle and resistance, [00:07:00] thinking about more desirable futures, which I think is what we also need at this time.

Chris: Thank you, Ernest. Yes. Well, from what I've seen, what I've read, what I've found on the Alba Sud website. Well, it is, it is a unique organization and site in the world. And so, I have a great honor to be with you today talking about these things and especially with you as the founder. And so, to add, to go a little deeper into the story, into your story, the next question comes from our mutual friend, colleague Macía Blasquez, whom I interviewed in season four. Europe. And he asks, "He claims that you have been, among many other things, an activist in Central America, as you told us, and so he wants to know how your opinions and your career have changed since then ?"

Ernest: Good question.

Ah, I started working in Central America as an accompanist. Well, first I spent six years going back and forth. I spent half a year in Central America more or less with another media outlet in Spain. And finally I stayed to work in Nicaragua with an organization called "Luciérnaga" now "Ilegalizada," dedicated to communication.

And from there we began to organize communication campaigns on different topics that had to do with the needs and rights of the majority of people and how they were suffering processes of dispossession of possession. And we worked around topics that had to do with health and sexual or reproductive rights or food sovereignty. And in one of these, we organized a campaign that lasted four years of research and communication on tourism.

In context, I'm talking about the year [00:09:00] 2004-2008, when Nicaragua was opening up to tourism at that time. And then we clearly identified the high levels of violence that this could entail with displacement processes.

And it was necessary to accompany the communities in these dynamics, which were also shared in El Salvador, in Guatemala, in Honduras, in Costa Rica, and at the same time, to begin to think about possibilities of "if it was possible to use tourism under the control of the communities themselves." That was my insertion into the world of tourism, fundamentally.

And from there, after working for about four years at Luciérnaga, we started Alba Sud and in part we recovered in Alba Sud that specialization linked to tourism. We thought, and it is something that we have reflected on many times with Ivan Murray, who you also interviewed, that we were not realizing from the world of [00:10:00] left of the importance that tourism had for the functioning of capitalism.

And sometimes when we said that we needed tourism, people took it as something irrelevant, as something superficial, even almost humorous, like you like to travel, right? And then it was like, how could we not realize, on the one hand, especially since the implementation of neoliberal programs, how tourism was helping to expand the processes of capitalist development, but at the same time, how it had a second very important function , which was how it helped to stabilize the disorders caused by that same neoliberal program?

I remember that I was very impressed when I worked in Costa Rica when I realized that in 1985, when the structural adjustment programs were implemented, [00:11:00] one of the things that was done was to dismantle the CNP, which was the national production council, which was what allowed for many years, the Costa Rican peasantry to have the security that basic grains, beans, rice, corn had somewhere to sell them at stable prices. And this gave security to the peasantry.

This was in the context of the application of neoliberal policies that were in fact blackmail, saying, well, in the context of a debt crisis, either you implement certain political programs to liberalize trade or you have no support in that context, the counterpart of shrinking the state and reducing it.

And one of the axes of the reduction of public spending was, for example, to dismantle the CNP, this national production council. And in exchange, what was asked of the peasantry was to stimulate them in the production [00:12:00] of crops that supposedly had better insertion in the international market to attract the arrival of foreign currency.

And there, vanilla, turmeric, and pepper were promoted, products that in the end did not work out. But at the same time, rural tourism was promoted as a mechanism for the peasantry, on the one hand, to contribute foreign currency with the development of tourist services, and at the same time to allow them to stabilize and not get involved in a dynamic that had to do with the suffering they were experiencing, which was generating very large migration processes.

So, with Ivan, one of the things we were reflecting on was that this tourism thing is starting to be very important for capitalism. And after the crisis of 2008, I think we became quite aware that the dynamics of the solution that capitalism finds for its [00:13:00] reproduction partly has to do with the expansion of tourism.

And we have seen this after the COVID crisis with the pandemic that we had in which... I perfectly remember a call that Iván and I had, we said that the same thing that happened to us in 2008 cannot happen to us in 2020, that we did not realize until much later what was happening. And so, we said "let's stop all the publications that we have pending and ask the entire broader team that is around Alba Sud, let's think about it and analyze that we are wrong, but let's analyze what changes this means."

And at that time, some people laughed at us. They said that we should be futurologists, that we had turned Alba Sud into a crystal ball and that we were trying to invoke the future. And in fact, what we were trying to do was the analysis from political economy to understand what was coming our way and in some way, answering the question that [00:14:00] Macia asked us, I think that what has changed my thinking is intuition.

In other words, what used to be an intuition was that we had to work, generating knowledge outside the logic of academic reproduction and we had to generate knowledge linked to the problems felt by the most disadvantaged people, that this institution was right and that there was a space to do that and that it was necessary to do it.

And that this was a space that we had to build in relation to the world of universities and academia, but independent of it, but also independent of companies, which is what we saw had also happened to some NGOs that for years worked trying to generate some kind of thinking around tourism, but that had quickly fallen into a certain trap of thinking that it was possible to influence companies, generate dynamics of responsibility, etc. And we thought that this was not the way to go, that it had to do with how [00:15:00] we strengthened other actors so that they could fight, resist and build things outside the framework of capitalism.

So, I think that, I don't know if many things changed in terms of thinking, but a conviction was consolidated about what we began to do in a somewhat intuitive way, it ended up becoming a space for research, collaboration, support, training, political science for a lot of people who are linked to tourism.

Chris: Yeah. Thanks, Ernest. Well, I feel that this insight has opened up a lot in recent years. And there are a lot of people in many places, usually touristy or over-touristy places, realizing and realizing not only [00:16:00] the consequences, but the patterns and, well, where we are going with the patterns or channels of conventional tourism, but also, as you said, in tourism, as a great factor in the expansion and destruction of capitalism in our time.

So, through Alba Sud and Icaria Editorial in Spain, you have recently published an anthology called The Discontents of Touristification: Critical Thinking for a Transformation of Tourism. There are tons of fascinating chapters, I have to say, by excellent authors and researchers, including works referencing Silvia Federici and David Harvey, Pierre Biourdeau, Donna Haraway, Foucault, Graeber, and Ursula Le Guin, among others. [00:17:00] I'm curious, Ernest, what was the impetus behind the creation of this anthology?

Ernest: A lot of times, a lot of the things that we do or push that are bigger, come from a phone call with Ivan Murray and we call each other and say, "We have to do this, we have to do that."

And what we ended up doing with these calls is some of us taking them forward. In this particular case, we had a recurring reflection that it was becoming less and less interesting to read about tourism or that we were less interested in reading about tourism and that to understand tourism, we needed to read other things. And even those of us who are dedicated to critical analysis of tourism realized that we were only reading a lot about each other.

And that in some way we were reproducing the same thing that was happening to the academy linked to tourism. It is a very endogamous academy, [00:18:00] very self-concentrated that discusses the same topics that are cited to each other and we realized that in some way, those of us who were dedicated to criticism and proposals outside of those frameworks, had the risk of not capturing part of the complexity that tourism development had to the extent that it was becoming increasingly larger and was penetrating more spheres of life. And there the idea was, we need to do when we shared with Iván and then Clément Marie dit Chirot joined, who is a professor at the University of Angers, who also collaborates with Alba Sud.

That's where the idea came from to say, well, we shared with you what you're reading, what you're interested in. And that's where we started to share authors. And the idea was born that we should do something with this. We held a first seminar in Barcelona on the work of David Harvey and in Lefebvre on what these two authors can contribute to the current understanding [00:19:00] of tourism development.

And it was a seminar, that's why the book was partly written. Sometimes people say, why so much Harvey and so much Lefebvre, because the origin of the book had to do with this first seminar, which was a test, an essay, on how can we get authors who have not necessarily spoken about tourism, how can we get them to dialogue with our object of analysis?

And there we made a bit of the same call that we had made in 2020 when we started working on the pandemic, which became two books. One was Confined Touristification and the other was Proximity Tourism, which was the same process of starting to ask our colleagues, friends, partners, what they were working on, what they were seeing...

Well, we did the same thing, we started asking around the Alba Sud team, people who collaborate, what authors were they reading that interested them and who hadn't talked about tourism before? And how [00:20:00] could we do the exercise of bringing them to the tourism analyses in order to strengthen them, to make them more solid, to incorporate dimensions that if we only focused on what we had been reading and writing about tourism, we might have missed. Of course, we were left with a lot of reference works outside this framework, that is to say, we had a volume with 25 chapters and we could have easily come up with a second volume, which is something we don't rule out, but not in immediate terms because of the amount of work that it also entails.

But if we managed to put a series of people in dialogue that allowed us, in some way, to enrich the tourism analysis and provide people who were getting into certain topics from the field of understanding how tourism works, to find theoretical references, criticisms of capitalism that could help them [00:21:00] at least, open paths, understand what readings we could make from them.

There are certainly authors who could have had another kind of interpretation, but it is the one that the people who collaborate with us did and in some way it was one of the possible interpretations. And well, that is the origin of the book and the motivation.

Chris: Yeah. And I'd like to ask you about, well, your chapter on Eric Ollin Wright, but before that, I'd like to ask you what kind of insights you were most surprised by outside of your own research?

Ernest: Yes, Ivan, Clemente and I not only read, but edit and discuss all the chapters.

Unfortunately, we had to reject some of them as well. In some cases, there were people who sent us writings that were more complex than the author himself. We chose those that needed to be understood or in other cases, we weren't very interested in reading them. [00:22:00] It wasn't that we accepted everything in this process.

And for me, one of the discoveries was Jason Moore and the work that Ivan did with him to think about or raise the hypothesis of the end of cheap tourism. This has given rise to a research project that we are working on at the University of the Balearic Islands, with the CRIGUST group in which I am working, thinking about saying, well, what does this scenario of chronic emergencies mean, this dynamic, in which capitalism has functioned based on the logic of having cheap nature... what does it mean if this starts to end? And to what extent is this model of tourism development that we have had in recent decades actually not subject to too many tensions? It is too much in crisis and we should perhaps raise the hypothesis of the end of cheap tourism, but [00:23:00] opening of new scenarios and based on this hypothesis we are developing a research project and in some way it has also served us at Alba Sud to think about the scenarios of this dynamic of reactivation. To say no, not everything is the same as it was before. I believe that to understand the current moment of tourism development at a global level, we must place ourselves in two crises:

We have already mentioned the neoliberal program and how neoliberalism incorporates tourism as a mechanism of expansion while at the same time stabilizing. But the last two crises, in 2008 and 2020, generate a leap in scale in terms of touristification, a process of global touristification like we have never experienced before, being an exponential leap, partly because after the 2008 crisis, a situation occurs in which the paths that had been chosen through bank loans , construction, mortgages, etc., collapse and it is not possible to continue reproducing capital through those paths. And this requires finding other mechanisms through which capital can be reproduced. There, David Harvey has spoken many times about the importance of the urbanization of China in this process of emerging from the 2008 crisis.

We understand that, in addition to this, the role of tourism is key. It is no coincidence that a company like Airbnb was born in 2008, that this expansion of urban tourism took place. In other words, it has to do with this logic. And the pandemic in some way stops it, but at the same time, it is an exit, a very aggressive reaction by capital to recover what it has not earned in previous years.

And so, this dynamic is like another twist.

At this point, Jason Moore's thinking is not useful for that, which I read fundamentally [00:25:00] as Iván Murray's contribution to this work that we are doing, in the malaise of touristification. This hypothesis of the end of cheap tourism that we propose based on the rereading of Jason Moore, what it allows us to think is, or rather to interpret, is the dynamic of profitability the same as before the crisis or is there something qualitatively different? And there is something qualitatively different, because we are facing a risk scenario for this capitalist development linked to cheap nature.

And that's where we realize that, in part, there is a champagne effect, that close to the reopenings you haven't been able to travel for two years and when there is the opening, people go out. But beyond this and what has been expressed to us in recent years in an excessive way, we have tourism in the most purified destinations, tourism of all kinds, from luxury to bachelor or bachelorette parties , who don't even rent a room, who simply spend the night on Friday and Saturday partying and leave on Sunday and that's it. In other words, we have everything.

And that is where I go back to Jason Moore and the idea of the end of cheap tourism, this risk of the end of cheap tourism, what we are beginning to realise is that we are beginning to see greater competition between territories, between cities, to attract tourism with greater purchasing power. They realise that we have emerged from the crisis and there are a series of chronic emergencies or what some call polycrises that are still present, which have to do with climate change, with the fuel crisis or the energy crisis and the crisis of materials with the interruptions to global supply chains, with geopolitical tensions.

And all of this alerts us to the risks that [00:27:00] tourism development has. We are in a very vulnerable scenario. In addition, after the exit, we began to see that there is an enormous level of destruction of ecosystems, not to mention, this logic of constant growth is unviable, because we have far exceeded the capacity of the planet and in that context we also see another cheap nature that is beginning to be questioned, which is work, that is, the idea of resignation, of resignation, and one of the great problems that companies have at the moment is the lack of personnel, people who do not want to work there and who look for work elsewhere.

So, in this context of what we call chronic emergencies that also feed off each other, what we are beginning to see is that capitals, through public authorities in different territories, are beginning to compete to attract tourists with greater purchasing power. They are looking for ways to concentrate that segment of the tourist segment [00:28:00] that will be less sensitive to crisis situations, that will continue to travel, and how to bring them back.

And it involves a huge public spending programme in terms of infrastructure to attract them in terms of international promotion, in terms of macro-events to consolidate that attraction. The problem is that, by definition, tourists with higher purchasing power are much less than the middle class or the working classes on which tourism has been based in recent decades.

And so, that competition between territories to attract that tourist segment with greater purchasing power increases. It is a fierce competition to attract that type of tourist and I think we are in this context. And I think we would not have realized it if one of the possible hypotheses that we formulated based on the book in Malaise in Touristification was not precisely this [00:29:00] idea that we extract from Jason Moore about the end of cheap nature.

The other hypothesis has to do with the work that he developed based on Erik Ollin Wright on the possibilities and how to transform the capitalist system, also speaking from tourism, which is something that Erik Ollin Wright never did, but I don't know if you wanted us to talk about it now or how you want us to put it.

Chris: Well yes, yes, I would love if you could talk a little bit about Erik Ollin Wright, because you specifically chose him, but also to start, because the chapter that you wrote is titled Postcapitalist Tourism: Following in the Footsteps of Erik Ollin Wright.

So, before we get into your works and your work, I would like to ask you, how do you define Postcapitalism?

Ernest: I start from an anti-capitalist position. And I have no doubts. If I [00:30:00] oppose this model of production, I think it will lead us to disaster both in human and planetary terms. From that position of that anti-capitalist conviction, what is raised is the need to find solutions that will lead us to another scenario.

We could call it socialism. We could call it eco-socialism. I don't know. I'm more interested in thinking about the possibility of thinking about horizons that escape capitalism. This is the position. Sometimes there are people who doubt, because it's one thing or the other. Not one thing or the other. If we start from anti-capitalism to try to build something outside of capitalism, but it's not something mechanical either, it's something we build. It's not a higher phase of capitalism. After capitalism there could be much greater forms of violence and exploitation. It's something we have to build. So, the idea is that we don't resist, we confront capitalist logic and from [00:31:00] we try to build something different, something that we can call metaphorically the post-capitalist moment, but one position is not contradictory to the other.

From there, I, honestly, am on this path of looking for how to think about the possibilities of transformation. This was clear to me. And when I approached different authors, Erik Ollin Wright was not an author that I found particularly sympathetic. He came from a social democratic tradition. He came from analytical Marxism, which was something that did not particularly appeal to me.

One thing that interested me in particular in his work was the methodological rigor in the ways of analyzing society. This was what I was particularly daring about. That is, going beyond the metaphors and the sometimes obtuse language of Marxism and starting to build using the best tools that we have at a given moment from the social sciences .

I admit that this was something that did attract me, but it is not necessarily all of Erik Ollin Wright's thinking, and Erik Ollin Wright interested me starting from reading Real Utopias and then How to Be Anticapitalist in the 21st Century, because of the vision he has. What he does is an attempt to recover different traditions of the left in order to think of a complementary action program.

And I am particularly seduced by this idea, how we think in complementary terms. That is to say, how one's action is what one can do, what one wants to do or what the conditions have dictated, but it is neither better nor worse than what the other comrade who is in another trench does, and how we stop competing over which is the best idea and begin to recognize that some are trying to make changes from the sphere of parliamentary political struggle, others do it from the union world, others from the world [00:33:00] environmentalists and others from the cooperative movement. To reintegrate and rethink together these different traditions of action on the left.

I thought it was necessary. I disagree with Erik Ollin Wright's position, which I do not fully agree with, which is this idea of denying the possibility of revolution. And let me explain, Erik Ollin Wright says, partly as a good social democrat, what he is saying is, after historical experiences, it is easily recognizable that when we have taken power after a revolutionary process, the dynamics that we have generated afterwards have been almost worse than what we were fighting against . And he is probably right.

And I have lived 11 years in Nicaragua and I know what I am talking about. I know what our assumptions mean when they are in power . So, be careful with this idea , the simple seizure of power in [00:34:00] The name of a flag, of a certain ideological crystallization is already a desirable and better future. Be careful because we actually generate worse monsters.

But what I disagree with Erik Ollin Wright about is that, although taking power in itself does not guarantee a society that is much more just or much more equitable, in the end, what you often find are dynamics of stabilization of new groups that rise to power and from there exercise control.

But I do want to say that we cannot give up the idea of social mobilization, even of taking political power as a defensive mechanism, as a response mechanism to the disorder generated by capitalism. In these contexts, even if it were to safeguard democratic dynamics, even if it were to safeguard, I think we cannot give up the tool [00:35:00] revolution, probably thought of in defensive, not offensive terms, but thinking that we are going to change and generate a better world from the immediate seizure of power. But yes, safeguard it as a defensive mechanism against the logic of the advance of the disorder generated by capitalism, the possibility of restoring certain balances through revolutionary processes.

I think this is the idea that we recover from Walter Benjamin when he says that sometimes it is marked as the revolution, as the locomotive of history and he says rather, it is the handbrake. That is to say, it is in the face of the precipice to think about this. Well, this distances me from this very categorical position of Erik Ollin Wright, but instead, it seems interesting to me how to build a possibility of a post-capitalist world from four great strategies or paths of what she calls the erosion of [00:36:00] capitalism. In other words, if it is not possible to turn it around immediately, we will probably have to think about a long-term transition in which this capitalist order has made holes from different areas of intervention and fundamentally from the state and from outside the state.

And he raises this idea of dismantling, domesticating, fleeing and resisting as forms of intervention. And what I do in the chapter is to raise, well, if tourism is so important in capitalism, how could we think about these categories, these dynamics of axes of intervention that contribute to eroding capitalism by making holes in it, by creating new logics, even if they are fragile, even if they are temporary, but as if to show, and how to somehow establish and grow areas of social functioning that do not reproduce the logic of capitalism, but rather [00:37:00] move in other directions. And this is a long process that will advance us, that will allow us to move forward.

And what I am trying to do is, how could this be from a tourism perspective? And that implies, on the one hand, intervention from the state, that is, on the one hand, from the state, understanding the state as the crystallization of a certain correlation of forces at a certain moment. We could think of it in terms of, well, it is the reproduction of, it is the mechanism that the dominant classes have to reproduce well. I would rather follow other authors of the Marxist tradition, such as Poblanzas and others, rather understanding it as a crystallization of a certain correlation of forces. And this can change.

Well, from that perspective, thinking about how, from the state, we can intervene by opening dynamics that work outside the logic of capitalism. One of them does not necessarily mean that they are anti-capitalist, which sometimes help [00:38:00] to stabilize capitalism itself, but they can be read in multiple ways.

One of them has to do with this idea of putting limits on capital, introducing mechanisms of control, regulation, taxation. That is to say, from labour inspection to taxation to the toning down of certain cities, what can be done, whether we can allow more hotels or not, right?

This whole dimension of "from the state," how do we put mechanisms of limitation and containment in place for the development of tourism capital? Another way, another strategy, like from the state itself, we generate, just as, for example, we have done in some countries in the area of health or in the area of education, how do we establish public programs that guarantee access to vacations, rest, etc. for a part of the population, with social tourism programs, [00:39:00] with the creation of infrastructure, from urban parks to improved public transport, support for social and solidarity economy programs, and cooperatives.

That is to say, how we, as a state, generate dynamics that contribute to guaranteeing access to vacations for the most disadvantaged sectors. The third axis of intervention proposed by Erik Ollin Wright has to do with the idea of resisting outside the state, that is, resisting in the fight against this disorder generated by capitalism, by tourist capital.

And this implies resistance from within companies with union organizations, but tremendous resistance from outside, from community, environmental, and neighborhood movements, that is, putting limits on capital, not only waiting for what the state is going to do with public policies, but doing so in a collectively organized way inside and outside companies. [00:40:00]

And the fourth dimension of this process of understanding the mechanisms of erosion of capitalism and in this case, of tourist-based capitalism, would be the idea of fleeing. We must leave this capitalist world here and now. And this implies creating cooperatives, try out different forms of organisation that allow us to guarantee holidays, rest, and different ways of constructing leisure time that may include travel.

And we can do this fundamentally from community organizations, from the cooperative sphere, but also from outside the market. That is, under the protection of the state and under the protection of the market. That is, reorganizing popular leisure without going through the market. This is what in some countries we call Sunday-goers, Sunday-going, making use of the Lord's day to [00:41:00] rest or scratch our noses or read under a tree.

It is this idea of doing what we want in a self-organized way, collectively or individually. In other words, opening up these spaces. So I think that these four dimensions are what allow us to think about the possibility of a transformation of tourism under other logics. And here I think we need to introduce a nuance because sometimes I feel that there is a certain confusion, as if everything were a problem of words. In other words, we refuse to use the word tourism because it is a capital word.

Well, what we fundamentally demand is free time, time freed from work. This is what we demand. And I think that is what we have the right to, the time that we free from work to be able to do what we need in terms of rest, nourishment for our thoughts, enjoyment, development, possibilities. [00:42:00]

This is what interests us. And this can be organised in the place of residence itself, in your immediate residential space in terms of leisure, entertainment, recreation. But if it involves travel, that is when we start talking about tourism and this tourism, we can organise it as involving leisure plus travel.

We can organize this, as we have done until now, under the logic of capitalism to reproduce capital, or we can organize this leisure time with movement to satisfy human needs. And that is where I think we have the core of the proposal. That is, how to think that a human practice, a social practice cannot be defined only by the logic of capital reproduction, but that we have to be able to develop it under other logics. And this is the demand.

That is, not resign ourselves to the fact that only the [00:43:00] capital to organize our lives. There is a phrase by David Harvey that is absolutely right when he says that there is no morally good idea that capitalism cannot share in something horrible.

And he is absolutely right. Capitalism has the capacity to do this, but we also think that at the same time, there is no social practice that we cannot organize under logics other than those of capitalism, that a socialist world, an ecosocialist world, could be organized under other logics and that has to start now and here. We should not wait for a revolution to come and we do not know how we will get out of it, but we have to start organizing it now and here. I think that this is the second hypothesis that we built on from this book, The Discomfort in Touristification, which I think, at least for me, there are many more readings of the book.

But for me , this idea that we get from Jason Moore about the end of cheap tourism and the dilemma between elitism or starting to think of proposals for transformation that respond to the needs of the social majority, this second hypothesis is what I think comes out most strongly from this book. Or at least that is my reading of it.

I am sure that other colleagues have read the book in other ways and it is stimulating them to do other things. And I think that is the power of the book, which is to begin to strengthen critical thinking in tourism by opening up possibilities for ourselves.

Chris: Mm-hmm. Wow,

Thank you, Ernest. I think that for many of us, especially those of you who have been doing research for a long time, limits or the limit is the word, it is the central concept [00:45:00] of how we can think differently when you were talking about these things, I thought, there are almost no limits to the institutions that we have in the modern capitalist world, only the limits that the institutions put on us. But then we have to reverse what is happening in the sense of putting limits on the institutions and then put on hold the limits that are imposed on our logic, our capacities or ways of thinking about the world, of understanding the world, but also of thinking about other worlds.

And then, putting a limit on how many flights can arrive in a place in a day or how many hotels we can build, etc. How many tourists can we have? But in the end when I think about that, sometimes I think like the towns in Mexico and Oaxaca where I live, some are ecotourism towns and have relatively closed economies or relatively much more [00:46:00] closed than the cities and that and they have the capacity, that if they are done, they set limits and say we are going to accept all x amount of people this year because we understand that the resources or the nature around will suffer if not. But also this. There are other questions, eh, like social influence, the exchange of capital between people from different cultures who come with expectations.

But then perhaps we start with the question of resistance, because in Mexico, like many other countries that rely heavily on tourist economies, the forms of political resistance, not all of them, but some of them, that are undertaken against those economies often target tourists as the primary beneficiaries or culprits. There seems to be a strong resistance to naming the local population as dependent on and defenders of these [00:47:00] economies. If we are going to build a political resistance that encompasses the economic needs of all people within a place, how can we move beyond this, I would say superficial, critique that has the capacity to essentialize foreigners and infantilize locals?

Ernest: I think that, well, you have said a lot of things that suggest a reaction to me. Ah, but to start at the end, I would say that many times we find ways of delegitimizing protests by saying well, we are all tourists, as if we had to have virtuous behavior, by appealing to a certain individual coherence in all our behaviors.

In fact, what they are doing with this type of criticism is simply denying the legitimacy of the claims, that is, pointing out the contradiction as if everything were an individual problem [00:48:00] of individual behaviors. And when what we are saying is that this is a political problem, not of a specific person, be it a tourist or a local population that resists and then goes on holiday, if the problem is, let's stop with moralism and looking for morally virtuous citizens. And let's start to consider that both are the political structures that put limits on this tourist capital. I believe that the bulk of the fight is to get out of this idea of individual responsibility of being trapped in these ideas of responsibility that also without discrediting it, that is to say it is another field of intervention, but the center cannot be the individual decision and the individual coherence in relation to our behaviors. It has to do with structural dynamics and what needs to be changed are group dynamics and for that we need to do politics with capital letters, it implies mobilization, but to [00:49:00] change structures.

What is the problem that sometimes, in this tangle of capital, makes it more difficult to identify who is responsible for these policies or this violence? Yes, those who, at the end of the day, make the decisions behind these investment funds. On the other hand, we have the tourist close by and can be effectively the target of the discontent, because he is the closest to you. So, and I believe that from the media, they try to place us in that terrain, when the idea of tourismophobia is put into circulation, which begins above all in Barcelona and then circulates internationally.

It is a campaign aimed at removing the legitimacy of the neighbourhood movement that is protesting. There is no tourismophobia. There may be someone who one day you dislike, but it is not a problem against a person. What happens is that sometimes the one who is close to you, the one who bothers you is the tourist, [00:50:00] It is the final part of this process and it is much more difficult to point the finger at the public, local, national and international authorities that have designed these representation frameworks, at the companies hidden in these financial dynamics.

So I think it is a contradictory process, but at the same time we should not give up on it. That is to say, the question here is not about how you are more or less coherent, more or less responsible, being a local population, a host or a tourist or being many things at the same time. It is not so much about that, but about how we reorganize the system of organizing the tourism system.

This is the key. Here is the problem. And this implies putting limits on it. And as you said in your first part, the intervention, yes, I believe that the word limits has acquired a fundamental political connotation. The latest demonstrations that are being organized [00:51:00] in Spain, the one we had two, two weekends ago in Barcelona, or the one that will take place this Sunday in Palma, especially let's put limits on tourism.

But this demand to set limits and at the same time that we set limits, we have to know that there is a part of the population that in Spain is 30 percent, but that the European Union also revolves around another 30% with very unequal levels, but that when we look at it from Latin America, it is much more, more than half of the population that cannot take vacations. That is to say that we are in that discussion but on the other hand, we have a part of the population that does not have infrastructures that allow them to take vacations, either because legally, they are not allowed to have those vacations in good conditions, that there are no infrastructures so that they can pay for them, that there is a lack of quality public programs of social tourism that allow them [00:52:00] to have those infrastructures.

So, I think the dynamic is twofold: one is to put limits on capital. And this has to be done as part of a reflection and a political intervention that is not individual in moral terms, but at the same time, we have to set a horizon of desire. We want something, we want to enjoy our free time.

We want to enjoy quality free time. One of the possible ways, but not the only one, may be tourism, which involves this leisure plus travel. And to do this and be able to enjoy getting to know other spaces, other places outside of my daily reality. To do this, we need social infrastructures that allow us to do so.

And I think that's where the battle lies: on the one hand, putting limits on capital and on the other hand, expanding. Offering a desirable world. We want to have free time. [00:53:00] We want to develop in our free time. We want to be able to organize our free time in our home, in our surroundings, but occasionally also by traveling.

And that means having public infrastructures and also mechanisms because money and the market will be the only way to decide who flies and who doesn't. If we have to go to a world with far fewer flights, it will be those who can afford them or we can organize it in another way.

How many times can you fly a year? How many times can you do it for how long? How can we, if it is imp, it implies an exercise that sometimes, when you raise it, it seems that these people do not live in the world, that reality is effectively different. This happens, but to advance in this direction, we need horizons of hope, horizons that tell us we must go there, not only as a loss of privileges, not [00:54:00] only to restrict ourselves because the planet is falling apart, but because we want to live better and we all want to live better.

So, I think that this conjunction, because if we don't have another problem that has to do with the growth of the extreme right in a world of insecurities, in a world of threats, who is offering security, even with racist xenophobic speeches of blaming the penultimate, blaming the last.

That is to say, in this context, how can we organize dynamics that, while we put limits on this capitalist tourism development, we are offering security, security in terms of control that also implies better working conditions. And control over this is also to be able to organize tourism in a different way so that you don't lose your job, but we can organize it in a different way and we can satisfy the needs [00:55:00] that many more people have.

I think that the issue is somewhere between resistance and the proposal of a desirable world also in tourism.

Chris: Well, the idea of leisure time, leisure time, is also moments outside of work, that in an analysis can be said to be a type of modern slavery, sometimes not, but sometimes yes, many times I believe, and that leisure time or rest is also a time to get organized.

Organizing the community. Organizing for other worlds or against what you have, eh? But tourism seems to have also been a tool against that. I mean, you already have your time off. But look, look, look at the beaches in Cuba...

Ernest: It's not exclusive to tourism. I mean, when we talk about tourism, we're talking about leisure, more travel. [00:56:00] If we don't travel, it turns out that this leisure that we do from our home is the most emancipatory in the world. I mean, being at home watching Netflix is the best, going to the mall to walk around because there would be a world of shitty insecurities.

That is to say, in this context, this is not something exclusive to tourism. In leisure, we also have these dynamics of alignment and commodification. So, we need to go beyond words to build scenarios that allow us to satisfy needs and expand possibilities, people's capacities to explore and live better.

But there are many examples that allow you in a diverse way and it is part of what we were saying at the beginning of the conversation about what we are working on at Alba Sud, trying to systematize a lot of these experiences that have [00:57:00] tested different aspects of transformation, to get out of these logics and move in other directions.

And I want to say that the problem is that many times the academy has not paid attention to these possibilities. And instead, in life, in everyday life, there are many more things that are being done that we don't need to start inventing, but we should also start by recognizing and recovering many of the things that are in our own history and also around us, in these other contexts where we can find rich experiences in these other forms and we will find them in leisure and we will find them in tourism.

But sometimes I have the feeling that when we only identify tourism as a process of commodification, we are shooting ourselves in the foot. Tourism, like many other things, can be that and it is indeed a dynamic of capital reproduction that [00:58:00] generates violence, structural and direct violence.

We have to resign ourselves to the fact that this is all it can be. We could imagine how we build this in another way, and to imagine, we must begin by recognizing what is elsewhere around us that is already working in other ways, and that perhaps some of these experiences are fragile, limited, have contradictions, fail, but they show that for a time it has been possible to organize this.

Next time we will fail better. And the next time, we will do it perfectly. In other words, it is a constant process of tension, of organization, of trying to generate changes that allow us to build a decent life, which also involves recovering that free time that we can organize in different ways. And here we could or could not include tourism depending on our needs and possibilities.

Chris: Thank you, Ernest. Thank you for offering that and [00:59:00] clarifying. So if we can imagine other worlds, other ways of walking and journeying together, we can begin to take steps toward those paths. If you could imagine an other world like that, free from the contemporary constraints of state borders, industrial hospitality, and extractive expectations, what would that look like for you, Ernest?

Would that trip you so much want to make be a pilgrimage? Would it be possible only once in your life? What would that trip be like for you?

Ernest: Of course, I would differentiate and think that it is necessarily plural. That is, that the options are multiple. There is no one answer, there is no one way to organize another type of tourism. There are or should be many ways. Depending on the many needs that people have. The other day, in an interview, I was asked how you spent your holidays when you were a teenager? As if thinking about [01:00:00] how to find that link to what now worries me and I say, what I did was spend the summers in the library.

And what I wanted was to have quality public infrastructures where you could read quietly, constantly. And I wanted public infrastructures that would allow me to do that. And I think that one way of organizing your free time has to do with having public infrastructures that allow us to organize it.

And there is no single way, nor a single need. Mine has to do with this or has had to do with this at a certain moment in my life and for others it is another and for others it is a different one. So I imagine not one path, but I imagine many paths that can respond to different forms and needs.

If I imagine robust and powerful quality social tourism programs in which [01:01:00] people can access the sea, they can access the mountains, they can access spaces that are close by and taking into account the limits of the planet, we can mobilize en masse to sleep outside our homes, seeing the experiences, but not only in infrastructures or natural spaces, but also involving an educational program designed to develop potential, how to see these different bets.

But I see this and I also see with desire the appropriations that people make of public parks, how people take over the park and celebrate parties and organize activities. I think we need to think in plural terms. That is to say, there is no such thing as a vacation. Perhaps in life, we will need to have the possibility of organizing our work time in a different way, which allows us to travel for longer than doing what would not make sense to think that we can universalize trips from Germany to the Caribbean for four days.

That doesn't make any sense, but we are sure that we will no longer be able to visit other territories. Maybe it will be less often in our lives. It will be for longer. It will be combining work with leisure time with spaces. In other words, I think that what we should open ourselves up to is the plurality of possibilities of organizing this part of our free time that we have associated with travel.

In some way, I think that what we need are horizons that are worth not only resisting, but mobilizing to move towards them. We want to live better and we have the right to live better. We have to resist all the shit and all the bastards that capital does to us. But at the same time, we have to be able to aspire to a [01:03:00] life organized under other logics. That is where I believe the key lies, something worth fighting for.

Chris: Thank you, Ernest, for those very important words and your reflections today, from me, my part and my heart and the part of the listeners as well. So, finally, Ernest, how could our listeners find out more about your work and Alba Sud and where they can buy Malaise in Touristification?

Ernest: To the south bass?

We have our website AlbaSud.Org. There, all our publications are free to download. We have a training section where we upload all the videos of the debates and activities we organize. Yes, the website is the tool. We have a newsletter that we send out monthly.

We are on various social networks , on Facebook, Twitter, Linkedin, we have a Telegram channel. There you can find out about what we do, the activities of the calls and with Icaria, where we have several books published, depending on where you are in Spain, it is possible in any bookstore.

If they don't have it, ask for it and they will bring it. And in many other places, I think you have to ask for it directly from the publisher. That is, in some Latin American countries, Icaria has normal commercial distribution. In others it is more difficult, but these works can be found on the Icaria Editorial website. And if they can't find it, they can write to us and we will sort something out.

Chris: Okay, so I'll make sure all those links are already on the Fin de Turismo site when the episode launches and once again Ernest, I wish we had more time to [01:05:00] talk, but probably another time. It was a great honor, opportunity to talk to you and I hope we can do it again sometime.

Ernest: With pleasure. I am delighted to be able to talk to you. And I am really sure that we will continue walking together. Thank you very much.

Leave a comment

Subscribe now

S6 #5 | Turismo Psicodélico y Sabiduria Indígena | Claude Guislain

Claude Guislain — Tue, 06 May 2025 14:08:18 GMT

Mi huesped en este episodio es Claude Guislain, un antropólogo peruano que pasa la mayor parte de su tiempo con pueblos indígenas en Perú, Colombia y Brasil. Con su primera investigación sobre el uso de la ayahuasca y el chamanismo por parte de los occidentales en Iquitos (2005-2007), inició el viaje que lo llevó a dedicar su vida a tender un puente entre la sabiduría indígena y el mundo moderno. A lo largo de más de quince años dedicados casi exclusivamente a apoyar tanto a curanderos indígenas como a pacientes y exploradores occidentales, ha estado al servicio de los procesos de curación de cientos de personas. Ha estado trabajando y formándose con los Shipibo desde 2013, ayudando a la familia López a construir su propio centro. Fue facilitador y asesor en relaciones indígenas en el Templo del Camino de la Luz (2015-2023). Trabaja y aprende con un mamo Arhuaco desde 2012, con un Jaguar del yurupari del Tubú desde 2016 y con el pueblo Yawanawa de Brasil desde 2018.

Hoy es asesor y miembro del Comité Técnico del Fondo de Conservación de Medicinas Indígenas y colabora también con ICEERS, y otras organizaciones, inspirándolas y ayudándolas a tejer sus esfuerzos y dones con los procesos indígenas de base.

Notas del Episodio

La historia y esperanza de Claude
La idealizacion de los pueblos indigenas
El renacimiento psicodelico
Curacion y cantos
Contradicciones en el turismo psicodelico
La deforestacion, la demanda y la continuidad del conocimiento
Conservacion biocultural
ICEERS & MSC

Tarea

Claude Guislain - Facebook - Instagram

Indigenous Medicine Conservation Fund

International Center for Ethnobotanical Education, Research and Service

Subscribe now

Transcripcion en Espanol (English Below)

Chris: Bienvenido Claude, al podcast El Fin del Turismo.

Claude: Chris. Muchas gracias.

Chris: Me gustaría saber si podrías explicar un poco de dónde te encuentras hoy y cómo el mundo aparece para ti?

Claude: Buena pregunta. Estoy, ahora mismo estoy en Rio de Janeiro, donde vivo. Soy peruano y también estudié antropología y dedico mucho mi tiempo a los pueblos indígenas, sobre todo en Brasil, en Colombia y en Perú y he estado trabajando en las Amazonas durante muchos años. Y como veo el mundo hoy, desde aquí, pues con mucha preocupación, evidentemente, pero también por lo que hago con alguna esperanza,

Chris: Yeah y pues en esa cuestión de lo que haces y de lo que hemos hablado antes, parece que es un gran camino, un camino de ya [00:01:00] décadas y décadas. Y me gustaría, si podemos viendo un un poco más de ese camino. Podrías comentar un poco de cómo llegaste en este gran momento sea por tus viajes, a otros países, a otros mundos, a otros maestros y maestras.

Claude: Sí, claro, a ver cómo te explico. Llevo unos 20 años trabajando con lo indigena en general, pero sobre todo con el tema de espiritualidad, plantas maestras como la ayahuasca y esas cosas, y llegue ahí como, creo que, como la mayoría de personas que hoy en día llegan ahí a la selva, o a buscar estas medicinas como se les llaman, que es una, una cierta o una profunda insatisfacción por nuestra propia cultura, por la respuesta que nuestra propia sociedad [00:02:00] nos puede dar existenciales, diría yo.

Es como siempre hay una pregunta que uno se dice, "No tiene que haber algo más. No puede ser eso solamente." Esa propuesta, digamos de occidente, no puede ser solamente eso, debe haber algo más, verdad? Entonces eso me embarcó a mí en una búsqueda desde, no sé cuando tenía por ahí unos veinti, veinti y pocos años.

Que me llevó a experimentar estas medicinas como la ayahuasca, el San Pedro, los hongos, no por una cosa lúdica, ni ni evasiva, sino por el contrario, con una curiosidad por otras formas de saber y conocer, . Entonces yo me acerqué a estas medicinas, con curiosidad de entender cómo los pueblos indígenas saben lo que saben. Cuál es el origen de su [00:03:00] conocimimomento verdad?

Entonces, estudié antropología. Me alejé de la academia rápidamente porque, me pareció mucho más interesante lo que me enseñaban los abuelos que para la antropología eran mis informantes, verdad? Era como, tenía que a mi informante tal, el informante tal. Y me di cuenta que no, que no eran mis informantes, sino que eran maestros y aprendía mucho más con ellos que lo que me enseñaba los libros, o las clases, o los seminarios, verdad?

Entonces decidí mas dedicarme a seguirlos a ellos y a seguir aprendiendo con ellos, y ver de qué manera los podía ayudar a ellos. Estos abuelos, estos sabios indígenas. Y eso me llevó a un camino maravilloso de que hoy en día le llamo "la gente puente," no? O sea, gente que estamos en ese lugar de interface, entre el conocimimomento, la sabiduría que nos queda de los pueblos [00:04:00] indígenas y el mundo occidental, el mundo moderno.

Y en ese nuevo tipo de encuentro que está surgiendo hace una década o tal vez dos décadas. Es este nuevo tipo de encuentro de nuestros mundos, verdad? Que hasta hoy era, siempre había sido extremadamente problemático, sino asesino, verdad? La manera con nuestro mundo occidental se encontraba con los mundos indígenas era pues y destructor. Hoy en día nos encontramos en una manera diferente, en el que muchos jóvenes y adultos y gente del norte global llegan en busca de conocimiento, de sabiduría, de cura, de sanación, de alternativas, buscando respuestas que nuestra propia civilización no nos puede dar. Habiendo un hambre, una sed de sentido por algo mayor, pues mucha gente empieza a ir allá con otros ojos, con un [00:05:00] respeto que no creo que había existido antes. Y eso trae cosas positivas y cosas negativas, evidentemente.

Parece ser que estamos mal. Hay una gran maldición, que, como todo lo que toca, occidente eventualmente se vuelve en un gran desastre. parece como un súper bonito, súper maravilloso, ilusorio, nos enamora, nos seduce, pero después al poco tiempo nos vamos dando cuenta de las de las terribles consecuencias que traemos, verdad?

Pero algo, no sé, algo también está cambiando, algo está mudando. Hay como una cierta madurez de ambos lados, tanto de los del lado indígena como del lado no indígena para encontrarnos desde un lugar en donde podemos celebrar nuestras diferencias y entender que esas diferencias son material para la construcción de un tiempo nuevo, verdad?

Entonces esa es la parte que traigo un poco de esperanza.

Chris: Ya, qué bonito. Gracias, Claude . o sea, yo siento [00:06:00] mucho de la esperanza, pero también de la desesperación por alguien que ha visitado a varios pueblos indígenas en las Amazonas hace como 15 años de más ya, en ese tiempo esas medicinas fueron llegando poco a poco a la mentalidad colectiva del occidente.

Y pues me ha ayudado un montón, no solo por cuestiones espirituales, pero también por reparar el daño que hice a mi cuerpo, por ejemplo, pero también metiendome en esos círculos, en las Amazonas, por ejemplo, pero también mi tierra nativa Toronto, Canadá y otras partes Oaxaca, México. hemos visto poco a poco la descuidado de la sabiduría indígena, las culturas indígenas, las medicinas, y más que nada, las contradicciones que [00:07:00] aparece dentro de el renacimiento" psicodélico. Entonces, ya tienes mucho tiempo en esos no solo respecto a la medicina, pero también en las culturas indígenas en las Amazonas. Me gustaría preguntarte que has visto allá en el sentido de contradicciones, sobre el turismo sobre la medicina, puede ser el lado del extranjero viniendo para sanarse, o igual los locales o indígenas aprovechando al momento.

Claude: Contradicciones tienen todas las culturas, tienen contradicciones. Y la contradicción principal es entre lo que se dice, no? Lo que se profesa y lo que uno ve en la práctica no? Es como si tú vas a la iglesia y escuchas al pastor hablando de cómo debe ser un buen cristiano.

Y después te paseas por yo que sé por Chicago o por ciudad de México, y ves lo que [00:08:00] son los cristianos y dices wow hay una enorme contradicción, verdad? Es terrible la contradicción Cuando hablamos de los pueblos indígenas y de los conocimientos, de los pueblos indígenas, la sabiduría indígena, parece ser que hablamos desde un lugar de idealización no?

Y a mí no me gustaría, caer en eso de idealizar sino tratar de ser muy concreto. Una cosa es la realidad, que es realmente terrible. Vivimos en un momento que es la cúspide, es la continuación de un proceso de colonialismo, de exterminación que no fue algo que sucedió con la llegada de los españoles, y los portugueses y el tiempo de la conquista. Y no fue algo que pasó.

Es algo que sigue pasando,. Es algo que [00:09:00] sigue pasando. Como decía el gran Aílton Krenak, un gran líder indígena de aquí de Brasil, y un intelectual, miembro de la academia brasilera de las letras, recientemente. Decía lo que ustedes no entienden es que su mundo sigue en guerra con nuestro mundo.

El decía eso. Él lo dice, o sea, ustedes no entienden que el mundo occidental, el mundo moderno continúa en guerra y de, y haciendo todos los esfuerzos para que las culturas indígenas desaparezcan.

O sea, en la práctica, eso es lo que estamos haciendo. Entonces, cuando yo hablo de esperanza, hablo porque hay algo que está surgiendo, que es nuevo, pero realmente es muy pequeño. Y como dices tú, cuando, o sea, la expansión de la ayahuasca, del San Pedro, de lo del peyote y de una cierto [00:10:00] respeto y un cierto entendimiento sobre la importancia de los conocimientos indígenas, todavia realmente e no entendemos eso, no entendemos. Y cuando hablamos desde el norte global, y lo que se llama esta el renacimiento psicodélico, cuando hablan de los pueblos indígenas, hay una idealización, sobre todo, es solamente parte de un discurso que es un poco "woke."

Es un poco para hacer bonito tu discurso, pero en la práctica no se ve, no, no, no ocupa un lugar importante. Ya está diseñado el camino por donde va esta revolución psicodélica, es extraer los principios activos de las plantas, hacer medicamentos, de hacer una pastilla que va a ayudar a la gente a mantenerse en mejor forma dentro de la locura que propone occidente.

Cómo le damos a la gente [00:11:00] herramientas para que se adapten y para que resistan, es el absurdo al que los estamos sometiendo, eso es realmente. O sea necesitamos ya drogas como "Brave New World", no como "soma". Te sientes deprimido? Tómate tus pastillas. Estás cuestionando mucho las cosas, tomate esto para que puedas seguir funcionando y operando y produciendo, verdad?

Pero hay una cosa muy, muy clara para mí, es que aún no hemos logrado entender la magnitud de los conocimientos indígenas. Y digo conocimientos, y no creencias porque en general, cuando hablamos de los pueblos indígenas, lo que sabe un chamán, como le dicen, un curandero, o lo que hablan ellos alrededor de su espiritualidad, la gente piensa, "ah, son sus creencias." Y en el mejor de los casos, dice "ay qué bonito, hay [00:12:00] que respetarlo, hay que cuidar sus derechos, y tienen derechos culturales y tienen todo el derecho a creer en lo que creen." Pero cuando decimos creencias, también es una incomprensión porque de creencia tiene muy poco en realidad.

Cuando uno estudia más, y cuando uno profundiza sobre lo que sabe hacer un curandero, un ayahuasquero, Shipibo, Ashaninka, Huni Kuin, Karipuna, Noke Koi Kofan, lo que ellos saben, no tiene nada que ver con las creencias. No tiene nada que ver con la adoración religiosa de ciertas deidades. Nada que ver. Estamos hablando de conocimiento profundamente práctico, verdad?

Es una acumulación de conocimientos durante generaciones y generaciones por estudiosos de la selva, que se organiza este [00:13:00] conocimiento. Socialmente y además que se transmite con un método. Hay un método muy estricto, muy específico de transmisión de estos conocimientos y de estas maneras de conocer, entonces te acabo de dar una definición no de una religión. Te acabo de dar una definición de ciencia.

Entonces, lo que no hemos llegado a entender hasta ahora es que lo poquito que ha sobrevivido hasta hoy de esos conocimientos se asemeja mucho más a una ciencia que a una religión. Es mucho más un conocimiento práctico que una creencia religiosa, verdad? Y en ese sentido, es de suma importancia. Y entonces, cuando tenemos más y más personas tienen esta experiencia, qué es lo que pasa?

Mucha gente viene a la selva en Iquitos, he trabajado muchos años, durante años he sido como el centro principal donde he recibido mucha gente para [00:14:00] tomar ayahuasca y esas cosas, y viene gente a sanarse de cosas que en sus países, pues no, nadie los puede sanar de depresiones, de traumas, cosas físicas también, pero sobre todo cosas psicológicas, verdad?

Y después vuelven y dice "oh, yo tomé ayahuasca y me curé." "Cómo te curaste?" "Ah, fui, tomé ayahuasca," pero nadie dice estuve tomando con un viejo que todas las noches me cantaba durante media hora. Y después venía en la mañana y me preguntaba cómo era mis sueños. Y después venía con otros remedios y me daba y me hacía unos baños. Y cuando me hacía esos baños me cantaba de nuevo. Y después me daba esto, y me daba esta medicina y me cantaba, y cuando él me cantaba, me hacía ver este tipo de... Nadie habla de eso. La gente dice "yo tomé ayahuasca y el ayahuasca me curó", pero el viejito que estaba cantando solamente parece un accesorio de un viejito cantando.

Pero no es así.

La mayoría de la gente dice, "Wow, cómo te curaste de eso? Qué pasó? Qué hiciste?

"Ah ya tomé ayahuasca. El ayahuasca me curó."

Verdad? Realmente yo he escuchado muy poca gente decir "el abuelito, la abuelita, me dio ayahuasca, pero me cantó durante horas, me dio baños, me preguntó mis sueños, adaptó todas las plantas y el tratamiento que iba haciendo según mis sueños, según lo que iba viendo. Cuando me cantaba, me guiaba para ver cosas, o no ver cosas."

Parece ser que el abuelito que cantaba fuese un accesorio, decoración. Y no realmente, no le damos crédito al trabajo profundo que ellos hacen, y el conocimiento que ponen en practica. Y no es extraño porque es muy difícil de entender, cómo una persona cantando, me va, me va a curar con un canto, verdad?

No, como para nosotros, es muy difícil, no tiene sentido. [00:01:00] Tiene que ser la substancia que tomaste y que se metió en tu cerebro y hizo alguna cosas de conexiones neurológicas. Yo que sé. No puede ser esa cosa, porque para nosotros, ya sería el pensamiento mágico, verdad?

Pero como te digo, eso que nosotros llamamos pensamiento mágico para ellos no es un pensamiento mágico. Es un conocimiento muy concreto que se aprende que tiene métodos de aprendizaje. Son conocimientos y habilidades, y capacidades que se adquieren con métodos de transmisión, verdad? Y hasta ahora no hemos logrado darle realmente el lugar que le corresponde a eso.

Por el contrario, estamos impactando en eso de maneras muy profundas, y hay una contradicción fundamental que yo veo en lo, en para volver un poco a la pregunta que me haces. En todo este turismo que ha llegado, y [00:02:00] esta fascinación, este interés. Cuáles son los impactos que esto ha tenido en las comunidades indígenas en el mundo indígena, verdad?

Entonces yo creo que hay dos cosas que parecen ser un poco contradictorias. Por un lado, hay una gran bendición. Hace 20 años, tú no veías gente de nuestra edad, jóvenes interesados en sentarse con los abuelos y aprender realmente, y ser continuadores de esas tradiciones y cultivadores de ese tipo de conocimientos.

La mayoría de gente de nuestra edad, un poco más viejos, hasta la edad de nuestro, gente que tiene hoy día 50, 55 años, 60 años, no querían hacer, no. Querían ser profesores interculturales bilingües, querían ser [00:03:00] profesionales, pertenecer al mundo de los blancos, verdad? Entonces, los viejos, eran de un tiempo pasado que estaba destinado a extinguirse.

Entonces, con la llegada de los occidentales y con este interés por esas cosas, ha habido cierto renacimiento y sobre todo, un verdadero interés de la juventud por aprender estas cosas como una alternativa profesional, digamos. Digamos, oye, para qué voy a ser abogado? Si yo, si mira todos los gringos que están viniendo, yo puedo ser esto y me va a ir mejor, verdad?

Entonces, por un lado, hay esa parte que, hoy en día vemos, por ejemplo, en los Shipibo, muchísima gente que está aprendiendo, verdad? Muchos jóvenes están interesados, no solamente en los Shipibo, pero sino, pero en muchos lugares en Brasil, en Colombia, en Ecuador, yo veo, veo eso, una juventud que está poco a poco interesándose más y [00:04:00] volviendo a sus propias raíces.

Es como, como decir, todo desde que eres niño, siempre te dicen, "los antiguos ser una porquería ya ese mundo acabó, lo único que cuenta es la modernidad y integrarse a la vida urbana, a la vida oficial de esta civilización, ir a la iglesia, tener una carrera, y ser alguien en la vida," verdad?

Y entonces era como, y los estados con políticas de esa naturaleza, los gobiernos, los estados de nuestros países, era, pues la cuestión indígena era cómo civilizamos a los indios. Civilizar al indio no es otra cosa que hacerlo olvidar de sus sistemas, de sus culturas, pero como una parte así de como digo, "woke," no como,

"ay, que lindo los indios que mantengan sus danzas, que mantengan su folclore, que mantengan [00:05:00] sus ropitas y que mantengan su ciertas cosas que es como bonito, que ellos mantengan como algo pintoresco y algo folclórico," pero sin entender realmente la profundidad.

Pero hoy en día, yo creo que en gran medida, gracias a esto, no solamente, es una cosa más compleja evidentemente, pero, la juventud, viendo que hay esta llegada de blancos, de extranjeros, de gringos, no? Interesadisimos por los conocimientos de los abuelos, por la medicina. Y que van y están ahí, dicen "uy acá tiene que haber algo interesante, yo también quiero aprender."

Si a los gringos les gusta esto, es porque algo bueno debe haber entiendes? Llegamos a ese punto en que estaba destinado a desaparecer, pero de una a otra manera, hay un renacimiento, verdad? Al mismo tiempo, [00:06:00] en la transmisión de estos conocimientos, como te decía sumamente complejos, sumamente estricta, estrictos métodos de transmisión, pues se ha tenido que simplificar porque los jóvenes no están aptos ya, habiendo ido a la escuela, teniendo un pie en la ciudad. No, no es tan aptos ni tienen el interés, ni las condiciones, ni las aptitudes para realmente entrar en esos procesos como lo podían haber hecho los abuelos, que hoy en día tienen 70, 80 años, verdad, que fueron realmente los últimos.

A menos que uno se vaya muy lejos en la selva donde lugares que no tienen mucho contacto, que ellos todavía deben de mantener algunas cosas, pero ellos están alejados también de estos circuitos,

Pero entonces, sí, hay una gran simplificación de estos sistemas. Entonces se pierden muchas cosas. Para bien o para mal, no? Mucha gente dice, bueno, por lo menos se está perdiendo toda esta parte de la brujería y [00:07:00] los ataques chamánicos y toda esa cosa, pero a lo cual se le da mucha, mucha importancia que tampoco logramos entender, porque nosotros lo vemos con esa visión judeo cristiana, esa distinción maniquea del bien y del mal, que en los mundos indígenas no es que no exista, sino que es totalmente diferente, no?. Y eso forma parte de esas diferencias que son importantes de entender y de respetar, verdad? Entonces, toda esta parte que nosotros vemos como brujería, como diabólico y tal, tienen su función dentro de un sistema, y que no, tratar de hacerlo desaparecer es hacer desaparecer el sistema mismo, verdad?

Porque no lo entendemos. Es lo mismo que pasa, es lo que ha pasado siempre, algo que nos escandaliza, entonces lo queremos cambiar, pero nos escandaliza desde nuestra propia visión del mundo y no estamos entendiéndolo desde la visión de [00:08:00] ellos. No quiere decir que todo se puede relativizar, verdad? Hay cosas que son, pues muy difíciles, no, y muy delicadas, pero en en reglas general, cuando hay algo que nos escandaliza, lo queremos cambiar, sin realmente profundizar en un entendimiento de la función de esas cosas, pues estamos siguiendo los mismos patrones que los curas que llegaban hace 400 años, 500 años. Que decían ah, esto es diabólico. Tenemos que extirpar estas cosas, no? Entonces seguimos haciendo eso.

Entonces, por un lado, vemos que hay un renacimiento del interés de la juventud y una reconexión con su propia identidad al mismo tiempo que hay una simplificación algo peligrosa de estos sistemas, quiere decir que los jóvenes que de aquí a poco van a ser los abuelos no saben la [00:09:00] mitad de lo que sabían sus abuelos. Saben lo mínimo indispensable que sirve para darle al gringo lo que requiere, lo que necesita, lo que está buscando, lo suficiente para hacer negocio en realidad y eso no es para culparlos a ellos, sino que es parte del sistema en el que estamos navegando, porque todo funciona así.

Para qué te vas a profundizar tanto si con este mínimo ya te alcanza? Sobre todo cuando vemos que muchos gringos, muchos extranjeros van toman ayahuasca unas cuantas veces o hacen alguna dieta, y después se llevan ayahuasca a sus países, se ponen las plumas, agarran su guitarrita, y empiezan a cantar estas cosas como decoración alrededor de esta experiencia y hacen mucho dinero.

Y así se ha ido expandiendo la ayahuasca por el mundo, verdad? Y eso cumple su función también. No es para juzgarlo, pero [00:10:00] también hay, es de una superficialidad, muchas veces, hiriente, cuando tú ves lo que sabe un abuelo y lo que ha tenido que pasar las dificultades, las pruebas y las responsabilidades que tiene un curandero amazónico para su comunidad, y los sistemas de rendición de cuentas que son los que más o menos lo mantienen a raya, que uno no puede hacer lo que le da la gana con ese poder, sino que hay un sistema de control, cuando esto sale y se va afuera en estos círculos, medios new age, medios hippie, medio neochamánico, pues toda esa cuestión se pierde y se empiezan a inventar un montón de cosas, y sobre todo, un discurso que es bastante problemático.

Entonces surge esta idea que la ayahuasca es la panacea universal, y "la madrecita ayahuasca" me [00:11:00] dijo, y, "esto es lo que va a salvar el mundo." Entonces más personas tenemos que buscar la forma que más y más personas tengan esta experiencia para salvar el mundo verdad? Y la verdad que yo creo que eso no es así. Si fuera así, si fuera por la cantidad de ayahuasca que se toma en el mundo, pues el mundo ya habría cambiado, porque realmente se toma mucha ayahuasca. Cuando yo, el principio de los años 2000 en Europa, era muy raro escuchar de eso no? Hoy en día, en cualquier país europeo, todos los fines de semana tú puedes encontrar una ceremonia de ayahuasca, en todas partes.

Eso se ha expandido. Se ha normalizado. Ya es mainstream, ya se volvió mainstream. Pero qué se ha vuelto mainstream? Nuestra propia interpretación, que es bastante problemática sobre esto y no se le ha dado el lugar que le [00:12:00] corresponde a los guardianes de esos conocimientos. Entonces eso es lo que yo tengo para criticar en todo este tema de la revolución psicodélica, que hablamos de psicodélico psicodélico, psicodélico, como la panacea, lo que puede salvar el mundo, pero cuánta experiencia tiene nuestra sociedad con los psicodélicos?

Dos generaciones? Máximo? Desde Hoffman, y esa, ya de la generación Beat, de los 50. Vale?, un poco eso. Y entonces, hoy día, tú tienes psychodelic studies en las universidades y formación de terapias con psicodélicos que los enseñan en institutos, de estudios bastante importantes. Y uno se pregunta, pero qué estudia?

Qué les enseñan? Qué podemos haber acumulado como conocimiento en esas dos generaciones, siendo que durante más o menos 40 años, esto ha sido o 50 o 60 años. Esto ha sido prohibido. Era [00:13:00] ilegal. Hoy en día se está más o menos legalizando, entonces se puede estudiar más abiertamente, se puede investigar, se puede aprender, se puede experimentar mucho más, pero durante muchos años, era ilegal, era underground, subterráneo, verdad? Entonces, qué es lo que hemos podido acumular como el conocimiento? Es mínimo, es muy superficial, sobre todo si lo comparas con lo que saben allá en la selva, los indígenas en México, los Wixarika allá donde, por donde tu estás, los mazatecos y toda esa gente que tiene conocimiento de los hongos.

Eso es una acumulación, de conocimiento extraordinaria. Lo que pasa es que, como son indios, no les damos el lugar. Qué me va, si tú tienes un doctorado en cualquier universidad del mundo y te sienta junto con indios, adentro de uno tiene esa terrible arrogancia que tenemos [00:14:00] los occidentales de decir, si yo soy un doctor, qué me va a enseñar un indio?

Entiendes? Y eso, eso demuestra que aún por más que tratamos de idealizar y por más que hay un gran respeto, y algo que esté cambiando, todavía seguimos regidos por un profundo racismo. Un profundo complejo de superioridad, que creo yo, que está la base de los grandes problemas que tenemos hoy en día como humanidad es realmente la arrogancia y el complejo de superioridad que tenemos como miembros de esta civilización, que es extraordinaria, pero también es la que nos está llevando el hecatombe verdad? Es la que está destruyendo el mundo.

Entonces, hay verdades muy incómodas que no queremos ver pero es la verdad, a pesar de toda la grandeza que hemos logrado con este, con los conocimientos de nuestra ciencia, es también nuestra misma ciencia la que está destruyendo [00:15:00] el mundo, nuestra manera de entender y de conocer el mundo.

Entonces ahora, poco a poco, nos estamos dando cuenta que necesitamos de la participación de estos otros pueblos que tienen otras maneras de ver, de entender, de estar en el mundo, y de conocer, de aprender otras maneras, no? Entonces sucede una cosa muy bonita y extraordinaria cuando juntamos personas que piensan diferente y realmente ya no es una discusión sobre cuál es mejor, cuál sistema es mejor, si mi ciencia o tu ciencia o no, sino que es como complementamos nuestros tipos de conocimiento, verdad? Lo que decíamos también, o sea, a partir de nuestras diferencias, con nuestras diferencias como material, que es lo que podemos tejer juntos, que no se ha hecho nunca, verdad? Entonces, eso es lo que está surgiendo también, pero en un contexto muy [00:16:00] problemático en lo que surgen los intereses económicos, financieros, grandes farmacéutica, grandes capitales que quieren invertir en estas cosas y no se les da el lugar a los grandes detentores de estos conocimientos. Y sobretodo no se les da lugar en el diálogo, ni en la creación de acuerdos, sino que no se le da una participación financiera de lo que se puede recaudar como beneficios a partir de sus conocimientos, verdad?

Entonces seguimos reproduciendo ese sistema colonial, ese sistema de explotación del otro y de la tierra, de la naturaleza en beneficio del capital, en beneficio para generar, ingresos económicos, no? Entonces estamos en eso es, es altamente complejo. [00:17:00]

Hay cosas buenas y hay cosas negativas. Hay un impacto muy grande también en la Amazonía con toda la llegada de toda esta gente, pero impactos positivos. Yo, yo he encontrado muchos líderes, en Amazonía que me dicen "gracias a ustedes que vienen acá. Nosotros estamos volviendo a nuestras raíces", "Si no fuera por ustedes, ya estaríamos perdidos."

Entonces hay algo que está sucediendo, que es algo muy positivo, pero también, como venimos con esos programas, no logramos darle la profundidad que podríamos estar alcanzando. Y que nuevamente, creo yo, que lo que está la base es nuestro terrible complejo de superioridad, que creemos que todos lo sabemos y que, pues somos mejores y que, qué nos va a enseñar, me entiendes? Aunque algo esté cambiando, aunque haya un poco de esperanza, todavía hay mucho camino por delante, [00:18:00] no?

Chris: Mm. gracias Claude poder sacar algunos de esos hilos del nudo enorme en que vivimos. Pues sí, yo siento que, una de las cosas menos escuchados en nuestros tiempos de gente que tiene comentarios, opiniones, lo que sea, es, pues "no sé la verdad, no sé" . O sea, hay una una falta enorme de humildad.

Creo que de la gente que critica la revolución o renacimiento psicodélico, o la gente que celebra no? O sea, hay una gran falta de humildad igual de tiempo profundo o de conocimiento histórico podemos decir, y como mencionaste, la cuestión de los abuelos y las relaciones que la gente tiene, o sea, las Amazonas y los pueblos indígenas ya por miles y miles de [00:19:00] años con sus lugares.

Y como poco a poco se profundizaron su propio lugar dentro de los otros seres en su ecología, en su ecosistema, sus ecosistemas, y que, ese idea de que alguien puede irse a un lugar así. tomar la medicina como es una pastilla nada más volverse o simplemente quedarse y decir que "ah me curó" o algo Pues eso, eso me suena como bastante fascinante, no? Y porque, para mí al final también tiene que ver con la relacion con los ancianos o sabios de un lugar o sea, el maestro mío me dijo una vez que son los jóvenes que hacen ancianos, que hacen sabios que hacen como elders no? No son los viejos.

O sea, los viejos son el vehículo para la función de esa sabiduría. Pero son los jóvenes que tienen que preguntar y [00:20:00] eso. Parece que está muy, muy perdido en el mundo occidental. O sea más bien la gente urbana, la gente del norte, la gran mayoría son migrantes o familias de inmigrantes.

Entonces, yo siento que la relación que tenemos con la medicina, que es solo medicina, es una pastilla o aunque sí, es un ser que no, como dijiste, como no tenemos a veces la capacidad de entender, el lugar del abuelo, abuela humana en esa relación, pues hay muchas, muchas direcciones que podemos ir en ese sentido, pero también lo que he visto, lo que he escuchado, he leído un poco es sobre la deforestación de las medicinas, las plantas sagradas, y que la gente va [00:21:00] domesticando poco a poco las plantas y que las plantas domesticadas no tienen la misma fuerza, en parte porque están cosechadas o cosechados más y más joven, más y más antes de su maduración, y que eso también quizás tiene algo que ver con nuestra contexto del occidente como la necesidad o rapidez o velocidad en que necesitamos conseguir y consumir la medicina y ser curado, etcétera.

Entonces entiendo que también has estado trabajando por algunas organizaciones que trabajan específicamente en la conservación de las medicinas, y también, otras que trabajan en la educación e investigaciones sobre lo etnobotánico.

Entonces, me gustaría preguntarte sobre y ICEERS y MSCF tiene [00:22:00] un, una perspectiva fija o quizás como desde tu perspectiva, cómo vamos en ese camino?

Claude: Mira, esa es una problemática, que corresponde a ese mismo sistema, no? O sea, en otras palabras, por ejemplo, cuando surgió este fondo, esta fundación, que es el fondo para la conservación de las medicinas indígenas o INC por sus en inglés.

La primera inquietud que surgió, o sea el primer impulso y el primer, el primer capital semilla para para lanzar esto era exactamente esa idea no? Estas medicinas se están expandiendo, más y más personas lo van a necesitar, lo van a usar. Entonces va a haber un impacto en la sostenibilidad de estas plantas.

Se va a poner en riesgo su continuidad, verdad? Cuando a mí me propusieron a [00:23:00] trabajar en esto y ayudar a la creación de este fondo, y me lo pusieron en esos términos, mi respuesta fue negativa. Yo dije no tengo el menor interés en trabajar en eso. Porque, o sea, en otras palabras, es ¿Cómo hacemos para garantizar la demanda?

Cómo hacemos para para que tengamos suficiente, vamos a hacer plantaciones de peyote y plantaciones de ayahuasca para que no se acabe, para que alcance para todas las personas en el mundo que lo van a necesitar. Y yo dije no tengo el menor interés en hacer eso. Además, no creo que ese sea el real problema.

Dije ahora si se tratase de la conservación de los conocimientos, estamos hablando de otra cosa. Eso es lo realmente precioso que debemos poner todo nuestros esfuerzos [00:24:00] para que exista una continuidad, para que no desaparezca como está desapareciendo, desaparece. Cada vez que se muere un abuelo y se han muerto muchos últimamente, sobre todo con el COVID, se han muerto muchos abuelos, pues se pierde, se pierde, o sea, es una tragedia para la humanidad entera, que se muera un abuelo que no tuvo la posibilidad de transmitirle a uno, a dos, a tres de sus hijos, a sus nietos, ese conocimiento, que no haya nadie que vaya a saber lo que sabe él, pues es una tragedia para todos nosotros.

Entonces, cuando estamos pensando en cómo vamos a hacer? Se va a acabar la ayahuasca, o hay plantaciones, si no es lo mismo, es una inquietud válida, evidentemente, dentro nuestra lógica. Pero olvidamos que lo principal es la conservación de estos conocimientos. Entonces, tanto [00:25:00] MSC como ICEERS se está enfocando cada vez más en un trabajo profundo de desarrollar relaciones, cultivar relaciones con estos abuelos detentores de conocimientos, con estas comunidades que aún practican, mantiene sus sistemas, verdad? Y trabajando con ellos, digamos para ellos, para con programas, y con proyectos, y procesos que son diseñados por ellos, guiados por ellos, y nosotros solamente nos dedicamos a dar, un apoyo técnico y financiero, no? Para garantizar esto, entonces, al hacer esto, al dedicarlos más a la conservación de estos conocimientos, nos damos cuenta que la cultura no puede sobrevivir sin el [00:26:00] territorio.

El conocimiento de los abuelos no tiene sentido sin un territorio, verdad? Y cuando hablamos de la conservación de la Amazonía, tampoco podemos entender la conservación de los ecosistemas sin la conservación de las culturas que han vivido ahí durante miles de años. O sea, todo va de la par, todo va de la mano, no?

Entonces con una visión mucho más holistica, digamos más amplia. Pues entendemos eso, que cuidando de la cultura y poniendo todos los esfuerzos necesarios para la continuidad de esas culturas también estamos cuidando a la Amazonía, cuidando la biodiversidad, cuidando el agua, cuidando las medicinas, cuidando todo.

Entiendes? Ya existen en Brasil enormes plantaciones de ayahuasca, de chacruna. Encuentras plantaciones en diferentes partes del mundo, [00:27:00] en Hawaii, y en Costa Rica, y en diferentes lugares. Ya la gente ha ido a sembrar hace años. Entonces, hay, no, eso no va a faltar. Lo que sí no vanos faltar, nos estamos quedando huérfanos de esos conocimientos.

Y eso sí que es una gran pérdida porque yo tengo la certeza, la convicción que en esos, en esos conocimientos están las llaves, las respuestas que nos pueden ayudar a resolver los grandes desafíos que tiene la humanidad hoy en día. Desde nuestra ciencia no vamos a resolver, estamos, estamos en una crisis civilizatoria, estamos en una crisis global, y lo único que nos dicen los científicos es que tenemos que reducir las emisiones de gases de efecto invernadero.

Y ahí van 20 años o más tratando de hacer eso, y no lo consiguen. No [00:28:00] solamente es insuficiente pensarlo de esa manera tan reduccionista, sino que, igualmente están acatandose a una sola cosa y no lo consiguen, no hemos logrado nada, no? Lo que realmente necesitamos es un cambio de sentido, un cambio entender una profundidad mucho mayor de cuál es nuestra relación como especie con este planeta.

Y para eso necesitamos los entendimientos de lo más extraordinario que ha guardado la humanidad hasta hoy, no solamente de la civilización occidental, sino de todos, no? Entonces, cada vez que se pierde una lengua, cada vez que se muere un abuelo sabedor es una tragedia para toda la humanidad.

Entonces, está muy bien que utilicemos estas medicinas, está muy bien que se esté expandiendo estas prácticas, pero esto sirve, [00:29:00] como un proceso inicial, como abrir una ventana hacia un mundo de posibilidades. Entonces, a mí me gusta que haya gente dando ayahuasca en Estados Unidos, en Europa.

Me gusta porque mucha gente tiene la experiencia y dice "wow, en verdad si hay algo más. En verdad, aquí hay todo un mundo que yo no tenía idea que existía y que podría leer millones de cosas, y puedo creer o no creer, pero teniendo la experiencia, ya no necesito creer. Yo sé que hay algo. Sé que la naturaleza está viva. Sé que la naturaleza habla, sé que hay manera de comunicarse con la sutileza del funcionamiento de este planeta, de las aguas, de los ríos, de los vientos de las montañas. Todo es un sistema que está vivo, y hay manera de comunicarse con eso y mantenerse en una profunda relación, simbiótica, de profundo respeto y de amor con todo esto no?

Entonces, es [00:30:00] importante que muchas personas tengan ese tipo de experiencia, pero después qué? Después de esa experiencia qué? Volvemos a nuestra vida normal, a nuestro trabajo de siempre, a la dificultad de nuestras relaciones cotidianas y el drama de la imposibilidad de mantener una conexión profunda con el tejido de la vida.

Todo de nuestra civilización está hecho para mantenernos desconectados de la vida, del funcionamiento de la vida en este planeta, verdad? Entonces, hacia eso es lo que tenemos que apuntar, porque el problema no son las emisiones de gases de efecto invernadero, el problema es nuestra relación con el mundo.

No es las historias que nos hacen creer que el mundo es una fuente de recursos para extraer, transformar y generar riqueza. Esa historia es profundamente [00:31:00] problemática. Y cuando conversamos con los sabios, con los abuelos, con los indígenas, escuchamos esas historias. Nos damos cuenta. Wow. Estas historias necesitan ser escuchadas.

Estas historias necesitan, necesitan ser contadas en diferentes espacios. Y estos abuelos, estos sabios necesitan ocupar el lugar que les corresponde en la mesa de negociaciones de la humanidad. No se trata de conservar esto como algo folclórico, como un derecho de estos pobrecitos pueblos que tienen el derecho de vivir, como siempre vivieron, como quieran vivir. No, se trata de nuestra sobrevivencia.

Entonces, hacia eso, creo yo, que debemos estar apuntando y sobre todo el tema de la revolución del renacimiento psicodélico yo creo que es una punta de lanza. Es una primera entrada en el que vamos poco a poco, demostrando que no se trata [00:32:00] solamente de convencer así retóricamente, sino que hay que demostrar, con hechos, la pertinencia, la utilidad de estos conocimientos para hoy para el mundo de hoy, verdad?

Entonces, el tema de la salud y el tema de la salud mental es como es una problemática gigantesca, no? Enorme, hiper compleja. Es la primera cosa que, más y más científicos y gente que decide se está dando cuenta. "Uy, aquí esta gente sabe algo que nosotros no sabemos y tiene una manera de saber y entender el funcionamiento de la mente y el espíritu humano que nosotros no tenemos idea y que realmente funciona."

Entonces eso es como una primera parte, como una punta de lanza. Estamos entrando en un lugar para poder demostrar al mundo. "Oye, lo que saben estos [00:33:00] pueblos es importante no solamente para ellos, no solamente para la continuidad de sus culturas, de sus tradiciones, no solamente para la salvaguarda de la selva Amazónica sino para toda la humanidad." Verdad?

Y es muy triste ver en nuestros países, en Colombia. Bueno, Colombia hay otro nivel de entendimiento mucho más maduro, sobre lo indígena. Creo que están mucho más avanzados en ese sentido, pero en Brasil, en Perú, en Ecuador, en México, no le estamos dando la importancia que merece a esta problemática, o sea al rescate de lo poco que ha sobrevivido esos conocimientos extraordinarios que se mantienen en las selvas, en los desiertos, en las montañas, que se han ido guardando en secreto hasta hoy, o sea es heroico que haya [00:34:00] sobrevivido hasta hoy. Y hoy en día nos estamos dando cuenta de la pertinencia y la importancia de todo eso.

Entonces, cuando hablamos de conservación, estamos hablando de conservación biocultural. Entender que no se puede preservar una cultura sin preservar la totalidad de su territorio, sin derechos de esos pueblos sobre sus territorios, y no se puede preservar los ecosistemas y los derechos si no se hace todos los esfuerzos para preservar esas culturas que han vivido en profundo respeto, en simbiosis con esos ecosistemas.

Y tenemos muchísimo que aprender. Todo este tema de la cooperación internacional, de las ayudas de las ONGs, de los proyectos de los pueblos indígenas es de un paternalismo triste y absurdo que en el fondo dice "ay pobrecitos los indios vamos a ayudarlos", vamos a ayudarlos a qué? Vamos a ayudarlos a que sean más como nosotros.

Eso es lo que estamos haciendo, creyendo que [00:35:00] somos lo mejor. Pero entonces más y más estamos entendiendo que es es mucho más lo que nosotros podemos aprender de ellos, que ellos transformarse en nosotros. Tenemos que re indigenizarnos, sabes?. Tenemos que volver a ciertas raíces que nos permitan una profunda conexión con la vida, con la naturaleza, con todos los seres que viven en nuestro territorio.

Y eso es lo que en la misma naturaleza, la misma tierra nos está indicando, nos está llamando. O sea, si siguen así de desconectados, los vamos a exterminar. Tienen que re conectarse con eso, entonces ahí yo creo que hay una, algo nuevo que está surgiendo, que es maravilloso, verdad? Y espero yo que eso llegue a más y más personas.

Estamos trabajando duro para eso la [00:36:00] verdad.

Chris: Mm, pues muchísimas gracias por esos trabajos Claude. Y por tener la capacidad de afilar el cuchillo, en estos tiempos y en nuestra conversación, para sacar la grasa, digamos, como digamos. Yo siento que es, es un trabajo muy fuerte, no? O sea, para mí, eso es el fin de turismo, la capacidad de parar, de ver al mundo como algo que existe sólo por tus gustos. Algo que existe en un sentido temporal, es decir desechable. Pero eso va a durar como un montón de trabajo en el sentido de recordar, de recordar que en algún momento sus antepasados, los urbanos, los del norte, etcétera, fueron indígenas.

Pero qué pasó? Qué ha pasado? Qué rompió [00:37:00] esa relación con la tierra? Y eso, eso es un trabajo muy, muy fuerte y obviamente generacional y intergeneracional, entonces. Pues hay mucho más que podemos hablar y ojalá que tenemos la oportunidad en algún momento, pero quería agradecerte por la parte de mí, por la parte del podcast y los escuchantes.

Y al final quería preguntarte, y para nuestros oyentes, si hay una manera de seguir a tu trabajo o contactarte, si estás dispuesto a eso, cómo se pueden conocer lo de ICEERS y MSC?

Claude: Bueno, tienes, el trabajo de MSC es muy importante. Y pues, si necesitamos a más gente que se sume, que done. Necesitamos canalizar muchos [00:38:00] recursos para poder hacer estas cosas bien, verdad? Con pocos recursos estamos haciendo cosas increíbles, pero ya estamos viendo que, ya llegamos a niveles en los que podemos administrar mucho mayores recursos. Entonces, si la gente se siente inspirada y pueden entrar a la página web de MSC o ICEERS, y MSC fund FND, ver lo que estamos haciendo, los diferentes proyectos que tenemos ahí y se sientan inspirados para donar o conseguir recursos, pues, genial. ICEERS también hace un trabajo extraordinario en la creación de conocimientos, artículos científicos y defensa legal también de estos detentores, de estas medicinas.

Trabajo con incidencia política con gente que decide en el mundo. [00:39:00] Entonces estamos luchando ahí por los derechos de los pueblos indígenas, por el derecho del uso de estas medicinas que en muchos lugares son ilegales, y también sobre todo, decir a la gente que más que ir a la selva, o tomar ayahuasca cerca de sus lugares, muchas veces ahí cerca también tienen una reserva, algunos abuelos, pueblos indígenas que están cerca de ustedes, no? En sus países, cerca de sus ciudades. Y pues es tiempo de reconectar, y es muy difícil, pero la verdad que vale la pena, ir, ver lo que necesitan, cómo podemos ayudar, cómo podemos colaborar, simplemente con esa presencia, con otro tipo de encuentro, y cultivar esas relaciones de amistad, es algo, es algo muy importante que podemos hacer hoy en día, y que, [00:40:00] pues la tierra nos está pidiendo a gritos que nos re conectemos. Y ahí están los abuelos, todavía hay abuelos que, como dices tú, solamente esperan que vengan los jóvenes a preguntar no? Y muchas veces cuando no son los propios jóvenes de sus comunidades, pues están muy felices cuando viene gente de afuera de otros lugares, con esas preguntas, porque los ayaban a practicar, los ayudan a compartir, pero también inspiran a los jóvenes de su comunidad a sentarse con los abuelos.

Creo que es un tiempo en el que es muy importante volver a sentarse con los abuelos, y los abuelos están ahí y están necesitando mucho de nosotros. Entonces, hagámoslo.

Chris: Oye, gracias, hermano. Voy a asegurar que esos enlaces están en la página de El Fin del Turismo cuando lance el episodio. Y [00:41:00] pues, desde el norte hacia el sur te mando un gran abrazo. Y gracias por tu tiempo hoy, por tu trabajo y por tus compromisos Claude.

Claude: Un placer, Chris, gracias a ti. Gracias por lo que estás haciendo. Saludos.

Leave a comment

Subscribe now

English Transcription

Chris: [00:00:00] Welcome Claude, to the podcast The End of Tourism.

Claude: Chris. Thank you very much.

Chris: I was wondering if you could explain a little bit about where you are today and how the world appears to you?

Claude: Good question. I am, right now I am in Rio de Janeiro, where I live. I am Peruvian and I also studied anthropology and I dedicate a lot of my time to indigenous peoples, especially in Brazil, Colombia and Peru and I have been working in the Amazon for many years. And as I see the world today, from here, well, with a lot of concern, obviously, but also because of what I do with some hope,

Chris: Yeah, and in that matter of what you do and what we talked about before, it seems like it's a great path, a path of [00:01:00] decades and decades. And I would like, if we could see a little more of that path. Could you comment a little on how you got to this great moment, be it through your travels, to other countries, to other worlds, to other teachers.

Claude: Yes, of course, let me explain. I've been working with indigenous people in general for about 20 years, but especially with the topic of spirituality, master plants like ayahuasca and those things, and I got there like, I think, like most people who go to the jungle today, or to look for these medicines, as they are called, which is a certain or deep dissatisfaction with our own culture, with the existential response that our own society [00:02:00] can give us, I would say.

It's like there's always a question that one asks oneself, "Doesn't there have to be something more? It can't just be that." That proposal, let's say from the West, can't just be that, there has to be something more, right? So that led me on a search since, I don't know when I was around twenty, twenty-something years old.

What led me to experiment with these medicines like ayahuasca, San Pedro, mushrooms, not for a playful or evasive reason, but on the contrary, with a curiosity for other ways of knowing and understanding. So I approached these medicines, with curiosity to understand how indigenous peoples know what they know. What is the origin of their [00:03:00] knowledge at the moment, right?

So, I studied anthropology. I quickly moved away from academia because I found it much more interesting what my grandparents taught me, who for anthropology were my informants, right? It was like, I had to have my informant, this informant. And I realized that no, they were not my informants, but they were teachers and I learned much more from them than what I was taught in books, or in classes, or in seminars, right?

So I decided to dedicate myself more to following them and to continue learning with them, and to see how I could help them. These grandparents, these wise indigenous people. And that led me to a wonderful path that today I call "the bridge people," right? In other words, people who are in that place of interface, between the knowledge, the wisdom that remains to us from the indigenous peoples [00:04:00] and the Western world, the modern world.

And in this new type of encounter that has been emerging for a decade or maybe two decades. It is this new type of encounter of our worlds, right? That until today was, had always been extremely problematic, if not murderous, right? The way our Western world met the indigenous worlds was destructive. Today we find ourselves in a different way, in which many young people and adults and people from the global north come in search of knowledge, wisdom, cure, healing, alternatives, looking for answers that our own civilization cannot give us. There is a hunger, a thirst for meaning for something greater, so many people begin to go there with different eyes, with a [00:05:00] respect that I don't think had existed before. And that brings positive things and negative things, obviously.

It seems that we are wrong. There is a great curse, that, like everything that the West touches, it eventually turns into a great disaster. It seems like something super nice, super wonderful, illusory, it makes us fall in love, it seduces us, but after a short time we begin to realize the terrible consequences that we bring, right?

But something, I don't know, something is also changing, something is shifting. There is a certain maturity on both sides, both on the indigenous side and on the non-indigenous side, to meet from a place where we can celebrate our differences and understand that those differences are material for the construction of a new time , right?

So that's the part that brings me a little bit of hope.

Chris: Yeah, that's nice. Thank you, Claude. I mean, I feel [00:06:00] a lot of hope, but also despair for someone who has visited several indigenous peoples in the Amazon for about 15 years now, during which time these medicines were gradually reaching the collective mentality of the West.

And it has helped me a lot, not only for spiritual reasons, but also for repairing the damage I did to my body, for example, but also getting into those circles, in the Amazon, for example, but also my native land Toronto, Canada and other parts Oaxaca, Mexico. We have seen little by little the neglect of indigenous wisdom, indigenous cultures, medicines, and more than anything, the contradictions that [00:07:00] appear within the "psychedelic renaissance." So, you have been in those for a long time, not only regarding medicine, but also in indigenous cultures in the Amazon. I would like to ask you what you have seen there in the sense of contradictions, about tourism regarding medicine, it can be the side of foreigners coming to heal themselves, or maybe the locals or indigenous people taking advantage of the moment.

Claude: All cultures have contradictions. And the main contradiction is between what is said, right? What is professed and what one sees in practice, right? It's like going to church and listening to the pastor talking about what a good Christian should be like.

And then you walk around, I don't know, Chicago or Mexico City, and you see what [00:08:00] Christians are like and you say, wow, there's a huge contradiction, right? The contradiction is terrible. When we talk about indigenous peoples and knowledge, indigenous peoples, indigenous wisdom, it seems like we're speaking from a place of idealization, right?

And I would not like to fall into that idealization but rather try to be very concrete. One thing is reality, which is truly terrible. We live in a time that is the peak, it is the continuation of a process of colonialism, of extermination that was not something that happened with the arrival of the Spanish, and the Portuguese and the time of the conquest. And it was not something that happened.

It's something that keeps happening, . It's something that [00:09:00] It keeps happening. As the great Aílton Krenak, a great indigenous leader from here in Brazil, and an intellectual , member of the Brazilian Academy of Letters, recently said, what you don't understand is that your world is still at war with our world.

He said that . He says that, in other words, you don't understand that the Western world, the modern world, continues at war and making every effort to make indigenous cultures disappear.

I mean, in practice, that's what we're doing. So, when I talk about hope, I'm talking about it because there's something that's emerging, that's new, but it's really very small. And as you say, when, I mean, the expansion of ayahuasca, of San Pedro, of peyote and of a certain [00:10:00] Respect and a certain understanding of the importance of indigenous knowledge , we still don't really understand that, we don't understand. And when we talk from the global north, and what is called the psychedelic renaissance, when they talk about indigenous peoples, there is an idealization, above all, it is only part of a discourse that is a bit " woke. "

It's a bit of a way of making your speech pretty, but in practice it's not visible, no, no, it doesn't occupy an important place. The path that this psychedelic revolution is going to follow is already designed, it is to extract the active principles from plants, to make medicines, to make a pill that will help people stay in better shape within the madness that the West proposes.

How we give to people [00:11:00] tools to adapt and to resist , that's the absurdity we're subjecting them to , that 's really it. I mean, we need drugs like Brave New World now , not Soma. Are you feeling depressed? Take your pills . You're questioning things too much , take this so you can keep functioning and operating and producing, right?

But one thing is very, very clear to me, and that is that we have not yet managed to understand the magnitude of indigenous knowledge. And I say knowledge, not beliefs, because in general, when we talk about indigenous peoples, what a shaman, as they call him, a healer, knows, or what they talk about regarding their spirituality, people think, "ah, those are their beliefs." And in the best of cases, they say, "oh, how nice, we have to respect it, we have to take care of their rights, and they have cultural rights and they have every right to believe in what they believe." But when we say beliefs, it is also a misunderstanding because it has very little of belief in reality.

When one studies more, and when one goes deeper into what a healer, an ayahuasca, Shipibo, Ashaninka, Huni Kuin, Karipuna, Noke Koi Kofan, knows how to do, what they know, it has nothing to do with beliefs. It has nothing to do with the religious worship of certain deities. Nothing to do with it. We are talking about deeply practical knowledge, right?

It is an accumulation of knowledge over generations and generations by scholars of the jungle, who organize this [00:13:00] knowledge. Socially and also transmitted with a method. There is a very strict, very specific method of transmitting this knowledge and these ways of knowing, so I just gave you a definition not of a religion. I just gave you a definition of science.

So what we haven't really understood until now is that the little bit of that knowledge that has survived to this day is much more like a science than a religion. It's much more practical knowledge than a religious belief, right? And in that sense, it's of the utmost importance. And so, when we have more and more people having this experience, what happens?

Many people come to the jungle in Iquitos, I have worked for many years, for years I have been like the main center where I have received many people to [00:14:00] take ayahuasca and those things, and people come to heal themselves of things that in their countries, well, no, no one can heal them of depression, trauma, physical things too, but above all psychological things, right?

And then they come back and say, "Oh, I took ayahuasca and I was cured." "How did you get cured?" "Oh, I went, I took ayahuasca," but nobody says, "I was drinking with an old man who sang to me every night for half an hour. And then he would come in the morning and ask me what my dreams were like. And then he would come with other medicines and he would give me baths. And when he would give me baths, he would sing to me again. And then he would give me this, and he would give me this medicine and sing to me, and when he would sing to me, he would make me see this kind of... Nobody talks about it. People say, "I took ayahuasca and the ayahuasca cured me," but the old man who was singing just seems like an accessory to an old man singing.

But that is not the case.

Claude: [00:00:00] Most people say, "Wow, how did you heal from that? What happened? What did you do?

"Ah, I already took ayahuasca. Ayahuasca cured me."

True? I've actually heard very few people say, "Grandpa, Grandma gave me ayahuasca, but he sang to me for hours, gave me baths, asked me about my dreams, adapted all the plants and the treatment he was doing to my dreams, to what he was seeing. When he sang to me, he guided me to see things, or not see things."

It seems as if the old man who sang was an accessory, a decoration. And no, really, we don't give credit to the deep work they do, and the knowledge they put into practice. And it's not strange because it's very difficult to understand how a person singing is going to heal me with a song, right?

No, for us, it's very difficult, it doesn't make sense. [00:01:00] It has to be the substance that you took that got into your brain and made some neurological connections. I don't know. It can't be that thing, because for us, it would be magical thinking, right?

But as I say, what we call magical thinking is not magical thinking for them. It is a very concrete knowledge that is learned and has learning methods. It is knowledge and skills and abilities that are acquired through transmission methods, right? And up to now we have not really managed to give it the place it deserves.

On the contrary, we are impacting this in very profound ways, and there is a fundamental contradiction that I see in this, in going back to the question you asked me. In all this tourism that has arrived, and [00:02:00] this fascination, this interest. What are the impacts that this has had on indigenous communities in the indigenous world, right?

So I think there are two things that seem to be a bit contradictory. On the one hand, there is a great blessing. Twenty years ago, you didn't see people our age, young people interested in sitting with their grandparents and really learning, and continuing those traditions and cultivating that kind of knowledge.

Most people our age, a little older, up to our age, people who are 50, 55, 60 years old today, didn't want to do anything, no. They wanted to be bilingual intercultural teachers, they wanted to be [00:03:00] professionals, to belong to the white world, right? So, the old people were from a bygone era that was destined to become extinct.

So, with the arrival of the Westerners and with this interest in these things, there has been a certain renaissance and above all, a real interest among the youth to learn these things as a professional alternative, let's say. Let's say, hey, why should I be a lawyer? If I, if you look at all the gringos that are coming, I can be this and I'll do better, right?

So, on the one hand, there is this part that, today we see, for example, in the Shipibo, a lot of people who are learning, right? Many young people are interested, not only in the Shipibo, but in many places in Brazil, in Colombia, in Ecuador, I see, I see that, a youth that is little by little becoming more interested and [00:04:00] returning to their own roots.

It's like, how to say, since you're a kid, they always tell you, "The ancients were crap, that world is over, the only thing that matters is modernity and integrating into urban life, into the official life of this civilization, going to church, having a career, and being someone in life," right?

And then it was like, and the states with policies of that nature, the governments, the states of our countries, it was, well, the indigenous question was how do we civilize the Indians. Civilizing the Indian is nothing other than making them forget their systems, their cultures, but as a part of how I say, " woke, " not like,

" Oh, how nice the Indians are that they keep their dances, that they keep their folklore, that they keep [00:05:00] their clothes and that they keep certain things that are kind of nice, that they keep as something picturesque and somewhat folkloric, " but without really understanding the depth.

But today, I think that to a large extent, thanks to this, not only is it a more complex thing, obviously, but, the youth, seeing that there is this arrival of whites , of foreigners, of gringos, right? Very interested in the knowledge of their grandparents, in medicine. And they go and are there, they say " oh, there must be something interesting here, I also want to learn. "

If gringos like this, it's because there must be something good, you know? We got to that point where it was meant to disappear, but one way or another, there's a rebirth, right? At the same time, [00:06:00] In the transmission of this knowledge, as I was saying, it is extremely complex, extremely strict, strict methods of transmission, so it has had to be simplified because young people are no longer capable, having gone to school, having one foot in the city. No, they are not as capable, nor do they have the interest, nor the conditions, nor the aptitudes to really enter into these processes as the grandparents could have done, who today are 70, 80 years old, right , who were really the last .

Unless you go very far into the jungle where there are places where there is not much contact, they still have to maintain some things, but they are also far from these circuits,

But then, yes, there is a great simplification of these systems. So many things are lost. For better or worse, right? Many people say, well, at least this whole part of witchcraft and [00:07:00] shamanic attacks and all that stuff is being lost, but to which a lot, a lot of importance is given that we also fail to understand, because we see it with that Judeo-Christian vision, that Manichean distinction of good and evil, which in the indigenous worlds does not just not exist, but is totally different, right? And that is part of those differences that are important to understand and respect, right? So, all this part that we see as witchcraft, as diabolical and such, has its function within a system, and that no, trying to make it disappear is to make the system itself disappear, right?

Because we don't understand it. It's the same thing that happens, it's what has always happened, something that scandalizes us, so we want to change it, but it scandalizes us from our own worldview and we are not understanding it from the vision of [00:08:00] They do not. It does not mean that everything can be put into perspective, right? There are things that are very difficult, no, and very delicate, but in general, when there is something that scandalizes us, we want to change it, without really going into an understanding of the function of those things, because we are following the same patterns as the priests who arrived 400, 500 years ago. They said, "Oh, this is diabolical. We have to eradicate these things, right?" So we continue doing that.

So, on the one hand, we see that there is a rebirth of interest among the youth and a reconnection with their own identity, while at the same time there is a somewhat dangerous simplification of these systems, meaning that the young people who will soon be grandparents do not know half of what their grandparents knew. They know the bare minimum that is needed to give the gringo what he requires, what he needs, what he is looking for, enough to actually do business, and that is not to blame them, but it is part of the system in which we are navigating, because everything works like that.

Why are you going to go so deep if this minimum is enough? Especially when we see that many gringos, many foreigners, take ayahuasca a few times or go on a diet, and then they take ayahuasca back to their countries, put on the feathers, grab their little guitar, and start singing these things as decoration around this experience and make a lot of money.

And so ayahuasca has been expanding throughout the world, right? And that serves its purpose too. Not to judge, but [00:10:00] there is also, it is a superficiality, many times, hurtful, when you see what a grandfather knows and what he has had to go through, the difficulties, the tests and the responsibilities that an Amazonian healer has for his community, and the systems of accountability that are more or less what keep him in line, that one cannot do what one wants with that power, but rather there is a system of control, when this comes out and goes out in these circles, new age media, hippie media, neo-shamanic media, then that whole issue is lost and they start to invent a lot of things, and above all, a discourse that is quite problematic.

So this idea arises that ayahuasca is the universal panacea, and " the little mother ayahuasca " [ 00:11:00] He said, and, " This is what is going to save the world. " So more people have to find a way for more and more people to have this experience to save the world, right? And the truth is that I believe that That is not the case. If it were so, if it were because of the amount of ayahuasca that is consumed in the world, then the world would have already changed, because there is really a lot of ayahuasca consumed . When I was in Europe in the early 2000s, it was very rare to hear about that, right? Nowadays, in any European country, every weekend you can find an ayahuasca ceremony, everywhere.

That has expanded . It has become normalized . It is already mainstream, it has become mainstream. But what has become mainstream? Our own interpretation, which is quite problematic about this and it has not been given the place that it should be [00:12:00] It is up to the guardians of that knowledge. So that is what I have to criticize in this whole issue of the psychedelic revolution, that we talk about psychedelic, psychedelic, psychedelic, as the panacea, the thing that can save the world, but how much experience does our society have with psychedelics?

Two generations? Maximum? Since Hoffman, and that one, already from the B eat generation, from the 50s. OK?, a bit like that. And then, today, you have psychodelic studies in universities and training in psychedelic therapies that are taught in institutes, of quite important studies. And one wonders, but what does he study?

What do they teach them? What can we have accumulated as knowledge in those two generations, given that for more or less 40 years, this has been or 50 or 60 years. This has been prohibited . It was [00:13:00] Illegal . Nowadays it is more or less legalized, so you can study more openly, you can research, you can learn, you can experiment much more, but for many years, it was illegal, it was underground, subterranean, right? So, what have we been able to accumulate as knowledge? It is minimal, it is very superficial, especially if you compare it with what they know there in the jungle, the indigenous people in Mexico, the Wixarika. there where, where you are, the Mazatecs and all those people who have knowledge of mushrooms.

That is an extraordinary accumulation of knowledge. The thing is that, because they are Indians, we don't give them a place. What do I care, if you have a PhD from any university in the world and you sit with Indians, inside you have that terrible arrogance that we Westerners have of saying, if I am a doctor, what is an Indian going to teach me?

Do you understand? And that, that shows that even though we try to idealize and even though there is great respect, and something is changing, we are still governed by a deep racism. A deep superiority complex, which I believe is the basis of the great problems we have today as humanity. It is really the arrogance and the superiority complex that we have as members of this civilization, which is extraordinary, but it is also what is leading us to the catastrophe , right? It is what is destroying the world.

So, there are very uncomfortable truths that we do not want to see but it is the truth, despite all the greatness that we have achieved with this, with the knowledge of our science, it is also our very science that is destroying [00:15:00] the world, our way of understanding and knowing the world.

So now, little by little, we are realizing that we need the participation of these other peoples who have other ways of seeing, of understanding, of being in the world, and of knowing, of learning other ways, right? So something very beautiful and extraordinary happens when we bring together people who think differently and it really is no longer a discussion about which is better, which system is better, whether my science or your science or not, but rather it is how we complement our types of knowledge, right? What we were also saying, that is, from our differences, with our differences as material, what is it that we can weave together, which has never been done before, right? So, that is what is also emerging, but in a very [00:16:00] problematic context in which economic, financial interests, big pharmaceuticals, big capital that want to invest in these things arise and the great holders of this knowledge are not given a place. And above all, they are not given a place in dialogue, nor in the creation of agreements, but they are not given a financial share of what can be collected as benefits from their knowledge, right?

So we continue to reproduce that colonial system, that system of exploitation of others and of the land, of nature for the benefit of capital, for the benefit of generating economic income, right? So we are in that, it is highly complex. [00:17:00]

There are good things and there are negative things. There is also a huge impact in the Amazon with all these people arriving, but positive impacts. I have met many leaders in the Amazon who tell me "thanks to you for coming here. We are returning to our roots." "If it weren't for you, we would already be lost."

So there is something that is happening, which is something very positive, but also, as we come with these programs, we are not able to give it the depth that we could be achieving. And again, I think that what is at the base is our terrible superiority complex, that we believe that we all know it and that, well, we are better and that, what is it going to teach us, do you understand? Even though something is changing, even though there is a little hope, there is still a long way to go, [00:18:00] no?

Chris: Mm. Thank you Claude for being able to pull out some of the threads from the enormous knot we live in. Well, yes, I feel that one of the things that is least heard in our times from people who have comments, opinions, whatever, is, well, "I don't know the truth, I don't know." In other words, there is a huge lack of humility.

I think that people who criticize the psychedelic revolution or renaissance, or people who celebrate it, right? I mean, there is a great lack of humility, as well as deep time or historical knowledge, we can say, and as you mentioned, the issue of the grandparents and the relationships that people have, that is, the Amazons and the indigenous peoples for thousands and thousands of [00:19:00] years with their places.

And as they gradually deepened their own place within the other beings in their ecology, in their ecosystem, their ecosystems, and that, this idea that someone can go to a place like that, take the medicine like a pill as soon as they come back or simply stay and say "ah, it cured me" or something. Well, that, that sounds pretty fascinating to me, right? And because, for me in the end it also has to do with the relationship with the elders or wise men of a place. I mean, my teacher once told me that it is the young people who make elders, who make wise men who act like elders, right? It is not the old people.

I mean, the old people are the vehicle for the function of that wisdom. But it is the young people who have to ask and [00:20:00] that. It seems that it is very, very lost in the Western world. I mean, rather the urban people, the people from the North, the vast majority are migrants or immigrant families.

So, I feel that the relationship we have with medicine, which is just medicine, is a pill or although yes, it is a being that, as you said, as we sometimes do not have the capacity to understand, the place of the human grandfather, grandmother in that relationship, well, there are many, many directions we can go in that sense, but also what I've seen, what I've heard, I've read a little is about the deforestation of medicines, sacred plants, and that people are [00:21:00] slowly domesticating plants and that domesticated plants do not have the same strength, partly because they are harvested younger and younger, earlier and earlier than they mature, and that this also perhaps has something to do with our Western context like the need or speed or velocity at which we need to get and consume medicine and be cured, etc.

So I understand that you have also been working for some organizations that work specifically on the conservation of medicines, and also, others that work in education and research on ethnobotany.

So, I'd like to ask you about ICEERS and MSCF has [00:22:00] a, a fixed perspective or maybe from your perspective, how are we going on that path?

Claude: Look, that is a problem that corresponds to that same system, right? In other words, for example, when this fund, this foundation, which is the fund for the conservation of indigenous medicines or INC for its name in English, emerged.

The first concern that arose, that is, the first impulse and the first seed capital to launch this was exactly that idea, right? These medicines are expanding, more and more people are going to need them, they are going to use them. So there will be an impact on the sustainability of these plants.

Its continuity is going to be put at risk, right? When I was asked to [00:23:00] work on this and help create this fund, and they put it to me in those terms, my answer was negative. I said I have no interest in working on that. Because, in other words, it's: How do we guarantee demand?

How do we make sure we have enough? We're going to start peyote plantations and ayahuasca plantations so that we don't run out, so that there's enough for all the people in the world who are going to need it. And I said, I have no interest in doing that. Besides, I don't think that's the real problem.

I said now if it were about the conservation of knowledge, we are talking about something else. That is what is really precious and we must put all our efforts [00:24:00] so that there is continuity, so that it does not disappear as it is disappearing, it disappears. Every time a grandparent dies and many have died lately, especially with COVID, many grandparents have died, well, it is lost, it is lost, I mean, it is a tragedy for all of humanity, that a grandparent dies who did not have the possibility of transmitting that knowledge to one, two, three of his children, his grandchildren, that there is no one who will know what he knows, well, it is a tragedy for all of us.

So, when we are thinking about how we are going to do it? Is ayahuasca going to run out, or are there plantations, if it is not the same, it is a valid concern, obviously, within our logic. But we forget that the main thing is the conservation of this knowledge. So, both [00:25:00] MSC as ICEERS is increasingly focusing on a deep work of developing relationships, cultivating relationships with these grandparents who hold knowledge, with these communities that still practice, maintain their systems, right? And working with them, let's say for them, with programs, and with projects, and processes that are designed by them, guided by them, and we only dedicate ourselves to giving technical and financial support, right? To guarantee this, then, by doing this, by dedicating ourselves more to the conservation of this knowledge, we realize that culture cannot survive without the [00:26:00] territory.

The knowledge of our ancestors is meaningless without a territory, right? And when we talk about the conservation of the Amazon, we cannot understand the conservation of ecosystems without the conservation of the cultures that have lived there for thousands of years. I mean, everything goes hand in hand, right?

So with a much more holistic vision, let's say a broader one. Well, we understand that, by taking care of the culture and putting all the necessary efforts for the continuity of those cultures, we are also taking care of the Amazon, taking care of biodiversity, taking care of water, taking care of medicines, taking care of everything.

Do you understand? There are already huge plantations of ayahuasca and chacruna in Brazil. You find plantations in different parts of the world, [00:27:00] In Hawaii, and in Costa Rica, and in different places. People have been planting for years. So, there is, no, that is not going to be lacking. What we are not going to be lacking is that we are being left without that knowledge.

And that is a great loss because I am certain, I am convinced that in that knowledge are the keys, the answers that can help us solve the great challenges that humanity faces today. With our science we are not going to solve them, we are, we are in a civilizational crisis, we are in a global crisis, and the only thing that scientists tell us is that we have to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

And there they go for 20 years or more trying to do that, and they don't get it. No [00:28:00] Not only is it insufficient to think of it in such a reductionist way, but they are also sticking to one thing and not achieving it, we have not achieved anything, right? What we really need is a change of direction, a change to understand a much greater depth of what our relationship is as a species with this planet.

And for that we need the understanding of the most extraordinary things that humanity has preserved until today, not only from Western civilization, but from all of us, right? So, every time a language is lost, every time a wise grandfather dies, it is a tragedy for all of humanity.

So, it's great that we use these medicines, it's great that these practices are expanding, but this serves, [00:29:00] as an initial process, like opening a window to a world of possibilities. So, I like that there are people giving ayahuasca in the United States, in Europe.

I like it because a lot of people have the experience and say, "wow, there really is something more. There really is a whole world here that I had no idea existed and that I could read a million things about, and I can believe or not believe, but having the experience, I don't need to believe anymore. I know there is something. I know that nature is alive. I know that nature speaks, I know that there is a way to communicate with the subtlety of the functioning of this planet, of the waters, of the rivers, of the winds of the mountains. Everything is a system that is alive, and there is a way to communicate with that and maintain a deep, symbiotic relationship, of profound respect and love with all of this, right?

So, it's [00:30:00] important for many people to have that kind of experience, but then what? After that experience, what? We go back to our normal life, to our usual work, to the difficulty of our daily relationships and the drama of the impossibility of maintaining a deep connection with the fabric of life.

Everything about our civilization is designed to keep us disconnected from life, from the functioning of life on this planet, right? So that's what we have to aim for, because the problem is not greenhouse gas emissions, the problem is our relationship with the world.

It is not the stories that make us believe that the world is a source of resources to extract, transform and generate wealth. That story is deeply [00:31:00] problematic. And when we talk to the wise men, to the elders, to the indigenous people, we hear these stories. We realize. Wow. These stories need to be heard.

These stories need to be told in different spaces. And these grandparents, these wise men need to occupy their rightful place at the negotiating table of humanity. It is not about preserving this as something folkloric , as a right of these poor people who have the right to live, as they have always lived, as they want to live. No, it is about our survival.

So, that is what I think we should be aiming for, and especially the issue of the psychedelic renaissance revolution, I think it is a spearhead. It is a first entry in which we are going little by little, proving that it is not about [00:32:00] Not only to convince rhetorically, but it is necessary to demonstrate, with facts, the relevance, the usefulness of this knowledge for today's world, right?

So, the issue of health and the issue of mental health is like a gigantic problem, right? Huge, hyper complex. It's the first thing that more and more scientists and decision-makers are realizing. "Wow, these people here know something that we don't know and they have a way of knowing and understanding the functioning of the human mind and spirit that we have no idea about and that really works."

So that's like a first part, like a spearhead. We're entering a place to be able to show the world. "Hey, what these [00:33:00] people know is important not only for them, not only for the continuity of their cultures, their traditions, not only for the safeguarding of the Amazon rainforest but for all of humanity." Right?

And it is very sad to see in our countries, in Colombia. Well, in Colombia there is another level of much more mature understanding about the indigenous. I think they are much more advanced in that sense, but in Brazil, in Peru, in Ecuador, in Mexico, we are not giving the importance that this problem deserves, that is, to the rescue of the little that has survived of that extraordinary knowledge that is kept in the jungles, in the deserts, in the mountains, that has been kept secret until today, that is, it is heroic that it has [00:34:00] survived until today. And today we are realizing the relevance and importance of all that.

So when we talk about conservation, we are talking about biocultural conservation. Understanding that you cannot preserve a culture without preserving its entire territory, without the rights of those peoples over their territories, and you cannot preserve ecosystems and rights if you do not make every effort to preserve those cultures that have lived in profound respect, in symbiosis with those ecosystems.

And we have a lot to learn. This whole issue of international cooperation, of NGO aid, of indigenous peoples' projects is a sad and absurd paternalism that basically says "poor Indians, let's help them." Let's help them with what? Let's help them to be more like us.

That's what we're doing, believing that [00:35:00] we are the best. But then we're increasingly understanding that there's much more we can learn from them than them becoming us. We have to re-indigenize ourselves, you know? We have to return to certain roots that allow us a deep connection with life, with nature, with all the beings that live in our territory.

And that is what nature itself, the earth itself is telling us, it is calling us. In other words, if you continue to be so disconnected, we are going to exterminate you. You have to reconnect with that, so I think there is something new that is emerging, which is wonderful, right? And I hope that this reaches more and more people.

We are working hard for that, really .

Chris: Mm, well thank you very much for that work Claude. And for having the ability to sharpen the knife, in these times and in our conversation, to remove the fat, let's say, whatever we call it. I feel that it is, it is a very hard job, right? I mean, for me, that is the end of tourism, the ability to stop, to see the world as something that exists only for your tastes. Something that exists in a temporary sense, that is to say disposable. But that will last like a lot of work in the sense of remembering, of remembering that at some point your ancestors, the urban ones, those from the north, etc., were indigenous.

But what happened? What has happened? What broke [00:37:00] that relationship with the land? And that, that is a very, very strong and obviously generational and intergenerational work, then. Well, there is much more that we can talk about and hopefully we will have the opportunity at some point, but I wanted to thank you for my part, for the podcast and the listeners.

And finally, I wanted to ask you, and for our listeners, if there is a way to follow your work or contact you, if you are willing to do that, how can they find out about ICEERS and MSC?

Claude: Well, you see, MSC's work is very important. And so, if we need more people to join, to donate, we need to channel a lot of [00:38:00] resources to be able to do these things well, right? With few resources we are doing incredible things, but we are already seeing that, we have reached levels where we can manage much greater resources. So, if people feel inspired and can go to the MSC or ICEERS website, and MSC fund FND , see what we are doing, the different projects we have there and feel inspired to donate or get resources, well, great. ICEERS also does an extraordinary job in the creation of knowledge, scientific articles and legal defense of these holders of these medicines.

I work with political advocacy with people who make decisions in the world. [00:39:00] So we are fighting there for the rights of indigenous peoples, for the right to use these medicines that are illegal in many places, and also above all, to tell people that more than going to the jungle, or taking ayahuasca near their places, many times there is also a reserve nearby, some elders, indigenous peoples who are close to you, right? In your countries, near your cities. And so it is time to reconnect, and it is very difficult, but the truth is that it is worth it, to go, to see what they need, how we can help, how we can collaborate, simply with that presence, with another type of meeting, and to cultivate those relationships of friendship, it is something, it is something very important that we can do today, and that, [00:40:00] Well, the earth is crying out for us to reconnect. And there are the grandparents, there are still grandparents who, as you say, are just waiting for the young people to come and ask, right? And many times when they are not the young people from their communities, they are very happy when people from outside come with these questions, because they help them practice, they help them share, but they also inspire the young people from their community to sit down with their grandparents.

I think it's a time when it's very important to sit down with our grandparents again, and our grandparents are there and they need us a lot. So let's do it.

Chris: Hey, thanks bro. I'll make sure those links are on the End of Tourism page when I release the episode. And [00:41:00] well, from the north to the south I send you a big hug. And thank you for your time today, for your work and for your commitments, Claude.

Claude: Nice to meet you, Chris, thanks to you. Thanks for what you're doing. Cheers.

Leave a comment

Subscribe now

S6 #4 | Radicalismo Rigido y el Algoritmo | alF Bojorquez

Fri, 11 Apr 2025 14:08:47 GMT

En este episodio, mi invitada es Alf Bojórquez, novelista y ensayista yucateca. Su primera novela, Pepitas de calabaza (2023) salió en la editorial Fondo Blanco. Se segundo libro, No existe dique capaz de contener al océano furioso. Potencia, alegría y anarquismo, apareció hace unos meses. Fue ganadora del premio Moving Narratives (2024) de Prince Claus Fund y el British Council. Ha hecho giras en América Latina, Europa, Estados Unidos, Marruecos y Filipinas haciendo lecturas de su obra y dando talleres sobre narrativa, arte y teoría crítica. Tiene un programa de radio sobre lo mismo que se puede escuchar gratis en cualquier aplicación de podcasts: Un sueño largo, ancho y hondo. Ha colaborado con varios colectivos y organizaciones abajo y a la izquierda.

Notas del Episodio

La traduccion de Joyful Militancy a Militancia Alegre
Diferencias en el radicalismo rigido entre norte y sur
Recuperando la miltancia y el contexto contemporaneo en militancia alegre
Tejiendo a la Organización Revolucionaria
La perdida de propiedad comunal en Mexico y la llegada del turismo
Las redes sociales como una arma del imperio
La imagen y la gestion, el usuario y el premio
Contraturismo como peregrinaje

Tarea

Pagina profesional - Instagram
Un sueño largo, ancho y hondo - Instagram
No existe dique capaz de contener al océano furioso - Volcana - Polilla - Utopicas - Traficantes de Suenos - Novedades don Gregorio (OAX)
Militancia alegre: Tejer Resistencias, florecer en tiempos toxicas
Pepitas de calabaza

Transcripcion en espanol (English Below)

Chris: [00:00:00] Bienvenida al podcast El Fin del Turismo, Alf. Un placer hablar contigo hoy.

Alf: Ajá.

Chris: Este me gustaría empezar preguntándote donde te encuentras hoy y cómo se ve el mundo a través de tus ojos?

Alf: Este hoy me encuentro en mi cocina. Desde ahí trabajo yo. En la ciudad de México, en una colonia se llama Iztaccihuatl. Cómo se ve el mundo? Pues mira, yo no tengo una vista tan mala. Este no es un edificio grande, pero tengo una vista linda, no? O sea, no me tapa la vista otro edificio ni nada. Se ven muchas plantas. Y bueno, supongo que sabes que yo soy de provincia. Entonces yo siempre he sentido que aquí donde yo vivo es como una, un poquito provincia en la capital, porque no hay edificios tan grandes.

Este y bueno, desde aquí se ve, se me olvida que estoy en CDMX ahora, sabes a

Chris: Gracias. Pues eres entre otras cosas, autora de varios [00:01:00] textos entre ellos Pepitas de Calabaza y el muy reciente No Existe Dique Capaz de Contener al Océano Furioso. También coordinaste la traducción al español del texto en inglés de Militancia Alegre:

Deje Resistencias Florecer en Tiempos T óxicos. (o Joyful Militancy) A esa traducción le siguió un podcast complementario con Pamela Carmona titulado Alegría Emergente: Deshaciendo el Radicalismo Rígido. Entonces, para empezar, me gustaría preguntarte cómo conociste, el libro Joyful Militancy y qué te llevó a traducirlo.

Alf: Yo conocí ese libro. Lo cuento un poquito en el prólogo, pero yo conocí ese libro, en Estados Unidos, porque yo tenía una banda. Yo toqué en una banda de hardcore punk muchos, muchos años, la batería. Y entonces así accedí a Estados Unidos y estando [00:02:00] en el underground americano, que fue una parte importante de mi de mi de mi vida, estando en en California en concreto.

Me encontré ese libro como en una cafetería y yo me enamoré. Entonces lo traje y primero lo leí en inglés con alguna gente y muy lentamente empecé a trabajar con ese libro, traducir. Eso es una historia más larga que está ahí bien en el prólogo, pero bueno, llevo años como militando ese libro. También hubieron una serie de coincidencias de gente muy amable como Tumba a la Casa, como los autores canadienses, los derechos nos los regalaron. Se metió la gente de Traficantes de Sueno.

O sea, en realidad hay un montón de gente. Es como una red de redes, ese libro y una serie de casualidades y favores y gestos agradables de mucha gente que logró que eso saliera como salió, la verdad. O sea, yo pienso mi irrepetible, esa esa serie de factores. Ajá.

Chris: Ah chingón. Muy bien, Bueno, pues ese libro originalmente [00:03:00] se publicaron en 2016. A leer, reeler y traducir ese texto, tengo curiosidad por saber que crees que ha cambiado de este entonces, o qué diferencias principales has visto entre el radicalismo rígido descrito en el libro de la anglosfera o America norte, Anglosajona y la hispanesfera o Latinoamérica?

Alf: Este? Pues muchas cosas que decir, no. La parte que confirmé yo fui trabajando ese libro, eh? Porque digamos que yo, todavía este año presenté ese libro. O sea, y le fue muy bien en Costa Rica. Fue la última. A mí se me acabaron los ejemplares. Y digamos, terminé mi labor con con Militancia en Costa Rica hace dos, tres meses.

No es tanto, no? O sea todavía después de la del programa de radio con Pamela, se hizo en Costa Rica de presentación y le fue muy bien, eh? Y se [00:04:00] reimprimió ese sí. Ese libro fue un éxito de muchas maneras, no? Y fíjate a mí. Una cosa que con por me pasaban los años, no me gustó, es que yo siento que tiene un lado como muy liberal, osea, hay un lado donde es demasiado suave, no? O sea, al criticar lo rígido, siento que se pasa de flexible, por decir así. Entonces, y eso pasa un poco como con ciertos radicalismos del norte, que tienen que ver con la retórica de la amistad de la ternura como tan enfocados en el cuidado.

Y así, yo siento que sin querer como por llevarle la contraria al opuesto, como el machismo lo rígido, bla, bla, bla, caen en una cosa un poco... o sea yo siendo que ese el libro o por lo menos mi lectura de ese libro, ya estas alturas, si lo siendo demasiado suave, porque yo creo que la parte negativa de militar y de organizarse, pues es importante, no, eh?

Es importante de hablar, no? Entonces, cierto que en el libro, se pasa de buena onda, por [00:05:00] decirlo asi. Creo que por eso es un éxito porque hay lado "pop" en ese libro, un lado suavecito, dulcecito, que se mastica bien. Y está bien para los activismo, pero hay una parte en mi que dice bueno, pero hay que hablar del resentimiento, hay que hablar del odio.

Hay que hablar de la importancia de romper entre nosotras, de pelearnos entre nosotros, sin caer en el castigo y la culpa y la persecución. Pero yo sí, creo que la ruptura o la negatividad en general ese el libro no lo logra del todo.

Habría que ir a otros lados y pienso que de un año para acá, desde que se recrudeció el genocida ahora, pues justo toca repensar el antiimperialismo, toca repensar cosas que no pueden ser tan flexibles, no? O sea, pues están matando, están cayendo bombas y no se trata de vamos a ver si nos cae el 20 o no, o cuando nos cae el 20.

Pues hay un imperio gestionando un genocidio que se recrudeció muy fuerte el último año. Y eso implica, se endurece, se endurece. O sea, ha cambiado el panorama político. Y hay [00:06:00] procesos donde podemos ser muy flexibles y pacientes, pero hay procesos donde no, donde hay que responder porque la bomba te ca en la cabeza, o sea, y ya está.

Entonces me recuerdo un poco como en los del paso de los 60s a los 70s, o el paso hacia los 20, no? O sea, históricamente esto ha pasado. Se acaba el hipismo y y llega la guerrilla. Se acaba el anarquismo y empieza el partido comunista. O sea, hay momentos donde la historia te come y se vuelve un poquito más pues no te voy a decir duro, pero pero sí, incluso en el norte, los anarquistas que venían de escribir ese libro como muy ticunistas se están volviendo más de izquierda, más revolucionario, más leninistas mucho. Y yo creo que eso tiene que ver, bueno, una especie el leninismo, pues moderno o buena onda.

El tipo zapatismo en versión anglo, pero yo creo que eso tiene que ver con las condiciones actuales. Yo creo que antes de la pandemia, después de la pandemia, son dos planetas, tanto por el reconocimiento de genocidia, como porque lo que se [00:07:00] hizo toda la década que para mí acaba en pandemia. Pues tenía un lado muy chido, pero también a un lado muy de todo es válido.

La insurrección ya está aquí. Y pues ahora decimos no, pues no está aquí. No estamos parando a Estados Unidos este el imperio, no lo estamos parando. En otros momentos de la historia, si se la podido o poner ciertos límites al imperialismo." No del todo, pero se han ganado algunas luchas.

Entonces, bueno, ese libro creo que fue de su época. O sea, 2016 y ese anarquismo de la amistad y de hay que conectar y fluir y todo ese lado que para un poco hippie. Creo que es muy de su momento, de la década pasada, pero yo creo que esa época, ya no es la nuestra, por las por las condiciones. O sea, porque estamos reaccionando y respondiendo y organizándonos frente a otros problemas.

Chris: Claro, claro. Y si podrias actualizarlo en tus propios palabras, cuáles serían los temas más importantes [00:08:00] para cambiar o reemplazar?

Alf: O sea, mira te voy a contar de otro libro, pero también es del norte.

Entonces, pues no me encanta darle tanto entre ellos, pero un libro que, por ejemplo, le respondería fuerte de ese libro, sería este que me regalaban los de Traficantes, ahora que trabaje con ellos en en Madrid, que se llama Hacia Una Nueva Guerra Civil Mundial, de Lazzarato, no?

Entonces digo, lo que pasa es que él es un leninista, no? Entonces, le pega duro, le pega duro. O sea, pero esto ha pasado siempre, pero hay varias banda que está respondiendo, no? O sea, por ejemplo, en el caso de este libro que te a acaba de mencionar Lazzarato.

Pues él dice que los últimos 50 años, incluido militancia, que estaría al final de 50 años, lo político como tal no se habló? Entonces, si le aplicas Lazzarato a Militancia Alegre, efectivamente, nunca se habla de que a ver, o sea, el gobierno estadounidense control el mundo y va ganando. O sea, y hubieron luchas en los 60s, 70s, que lograron más o menos parar [00:09:00] ese imperialismo, los liberaciones nacionales, por ejemplo.

Las luchas de empezamos por Vietnam, Malher y Cuba y acabando con otras. Si más o menos se le pudo parar a ese imperialismo de ese momento? Pero por ejemplo, Militancia en ni un solo momento habla de política en un sentido duro, no? O sea anti-Trump, por ejemplo, anti-global como global north o norte y global. O sea, en el sentido que gobiernan en el mundo, no?

Y eso no se habla no? O sea, en ningún momento se dice bueno, nosotras, como norte, tenemos una deuda con el sur, no solo económica, sino política, no? O sea, en cuanto a no permitir la autonomía de los sur. Y palestina y Líbano es el, pues es el caso más extremo, no? Aunque aquí es lo mismo, no? O sea, la lucha la guerra contra los zapatistas es el mismo genocidio, con la misma bala.

O sea el mismo inversionista, las mismas ganancias. Es el mismo genocidio. Entonces, pero no hablar de eso, no hablar de lo meramente político, [00:10:00] no? O sea de como Morena trabaja para el gobierno gringo y mata a los zapatistas y los centroamericanos. Al no hablar de este tipo de cosas como duramente políticas.

O sea, como Trump controla a la milicia mexicana, la la la. Pues sí que es un libro hippie, no? O sea, en el sentido de que, ahí los leninistas tienen un punto. En este caso, Lazzarato pero mucha otra banda, al contestarle a la banda anárquica. Si muy chida la amistad y muy chida la... Lets tune in.

O sea, está bien, pero tú estás parada en un mundo que de beneficia de destruir este mundo donde tú y yo estamos parada, no? Entonces, de muchas maneras: lo real, lo simbólico en lo económico. El turismo, para mí solo es un capítulo de esa serie de industrias de muerte. Entonces no, al no hablarlo.

Yo pienso que es un libro que omite el lugar de enunciación principal, que es el imperio si habla del imperio, pero yo siento que si le faltó lo político político. Osea, como el norte domina y controla [00:11:00] al sur, el gobierno del norte en concreto.

Al no hablar eso pues si hizo darle un libro que pues no sé cómo va a envejecer. O sea, digo, bueno, a ver cómo le va, porque porque sí que sirve para lo que sirvió Tiqqun y esas cosas en su momento que era contestarle a la izquierda vertical, por decir así. Pero ese momento, por lo menos en el norte, ya pasó, no? Y ellos esos mismos ya regresaron a la verticalidad.

O sea, los que atacaron al leninismo, estamos en esta otra. Entonces chistosasto porque ellos tienen sus propios ciclos y nosotras tenemos otros ciclos de lucha, no? Y otras genealogías y otras retóricas. O sea, es muy diferente. Ahí la traducción. Por eso milita tanto ese libro porque, había que defender nuestro propio contexto, no?

Y decir bueno, es la genealogia de ellos, la nuestra tiene otras conceptos. O sea, ha ganado guerras y revoluciones. Hay muchos triunfos en nuestra historia del sur. De hecho, en la del norte hay más derrotas y en cambio, [00:12:00] las liberaciones nacionales, pues prácticamente todas triunfaron, si las piensas, contra el imperialismo.

Claro que ya no está de moda hablar de eso porque de colonial ya está en otra... ya se fue a otro lado. No? La mayoría de de anticolonial ya no está viniendo su genealogía en las luchas de liberación nacional y o la violencia?

Ya la violencia pasó de moda y justo este libro tiene algo de eso? Como de no hay que hablar de cómo en México tuvimos que tirar balazos para recuperarlo un poco que tenemos. No! Hay que hablar de la amistad del amor, la ternura. Esa parte es la que yo pienso que ya no le habla mucho a nuestro tiempo y a ver qué va a pasar después, a ver qué va a pasar después.

No, aunque tienes utilidad, no? O sea, mucha gente que está en el activismo vive con mucho, cariño de ese libro y está bien. O sea, Creo que está bien. Yo creo que le falta la parte política y negativa, pero bueno, no lo pudimos pedir todo a un solo libro. No.

Eso es lo que hicieron los europeos con nosotros, traer la biblia y [00:13:00] matarnos pretexto de un solo libro. Entonces yo creo que no hay que caer. Eso es, es colonial quererle pedir todo a un solo libro. Si ese libro dio lo que tuvo que dar en su contexto y ese contexto para mí pasó este listo. O sea, fue una herramienta útil que respondió y ya este lo que sigue.

Chris: Pues sí, este recuerdo que hubo una, una nota de pie en en el libro, de Silvia Federici y la tengo.

La cita aquí decía que

"lo que más importa es descubrir y recreer la memoria colectiva de las luchas pasadas. En los Estados Unidos, hay un intento sistemático de destruir esta memoria. Y ahora esto se está extendiendo por todo el mundo. Revivir la memoria de las luchas del pasado nos hace sentir ser parte de algo más grande que nuestras vidas individuales y de esta manera de un nuevo sentido a lo que estamos haciendo y nos da coraje, porque nos hace tener menos miedo en lo que [00:14:00] nos puede pasar individualmente."

Y siento que hay algo allá como también la, no sé si está impulsado desde arriba o si es solo una falta de memoria, pero sí, siento que es, es muy fuerte que hay una falta de linaje, en la política en el día de hoy, en los momentos sociales contemporáneos. Pero pues, quería preguntarte un poco de tus experiencias también con el turismo. Me gustaría preguntarle de qué tipo de reacciones recibiste, recibieron cómo resultado del podcast y si esas conversaciones cambiaron sus ideas sobre los temas tratados.

Alf: Este una parte había que preguntárselo directo a Pame porque yo creo que ella lo vivió a su forma también. Pero bueno, pues fue muy chido. Primero que nada, lo lo bonito. Ese programa varias cosas. Primero, ese programa fue apoyado por el instituto de estudios anarquistas americano, y eso [00:15:00] fue lindo, tener el apoyo. O sea, no precarizarnos tanto. Y tampoco tener que pedirle dinero a gente de mierda para hacer co chidas no, eso siempre se siente bien. Como no traicionar el contenido, o sea que vaya mucho la forma con el fondo, no. Entonces, de entrada, eso fue muy alegre. De segunda gran alegría, yo siempre trabajo a puerta cerrada.

Yo soy un poco celosa de mi trabajo. Entonces, pues a abrir la puerta y trabajar con no solo dos, vieron un podcast que éramos cuatro, cinco. Eso es rarísimo. Yo nunca había hecho eso. Yo no suelo hacer eso. Si, trabajo con gente, pero no con el micrófono, normalmente no, eh?

Siempre trabaj o con grupos y movimientos y cosas, pero digamos que a puerta cerrada por decir así o o coyunturas específicas. Entonces, primero la congruencia que yo siento que tuvo ese programa, como alinearnos en un anarquismo internacionalista, que yo creo que hay que recuperar.

El internacionalismo en general, eh? Y creo que a [00:16:00] veces la lucha contra el turismo sin querer se vuelve muy nacionalista y no distingue entre migrante y turista esas cosas, como en un México, es mejor que todo lo demás. Un poco raro, pero bueno, antes de perderme, yo creo que ahí hubo un gesto internacionalista lindo.

O sea, entre anarquistas del norte con los del sur primero y segundo, pues, abrir el micro porque que yo no es algo que suelo o solía hacer hasta hace hasta este año, por decir, o sea, yo llevo en un monólogo de locutora varios años porque mi parte social la hago cuerpo a cuerpo, por decir así. Y ya te podría platicar muchas cosas.

Pero a mí me emociono muchísimo el programa con Tejiendo a la Organización Revolucionaria, eh? La verdad me encantó. O sea, a mí ellos me parece que hacen un trabajo importante. Y me parece que nuestro tiempo se está pensando desde los revolucionarios también. No necesariamente como la decada pasada la insurreccional y el todo se vale.

Este, yo creo que está [00:17:00] cambiando un poco esos enfoques y justo ellos que llevan más de 20 años y son como 50 personas organizadas desde abajo con mucha claridad y mucha fuerza. Pues hicimos un puente muy chido, no entre en anarquismo y otras partes de la izquierda radical, que normalmente no nos damos la mano y no platica.

O sea, no es común ni es fácil. Y cuando se da, suele ser tenso. Y no hubo para mí nada de tensión, al revés. Hubo una complementación muy chida contorno. Es el último capítulo de Emergente. Bueno, o sea, y siento que conecta con Militancia Alegre. O sea, llamarla en militancia y no "activismo alegre" era una provocación de los autores.

Y yo creo que movimiento es como ?, entre muchos otros que se mencionan justos son militantes, no activistas, no? O sea que el activista tiene genealogía muy del norte y muy de los noventas para acá. Y yo creo que ellos como que leídos por "los cool" que Militancia Alegre sigue siendo el libro más cool, como que no suelen voltear, la gente cool, no suele voltear a ver a ese tipo de militancias como Thor. [00:18:00] Todos estuvieron muy chidos, pero yo le tengo especial cariño, a ese último, porque sí, pienso que hay que pensar alianzas insólitas, como todas las izquierdas radicales, tratar de articular.

Y para mí, eso lo más cercano fue contorno. Y yo lo sigo reescuchando. Y hay cosas que me dejar pensando, por ejemplo, lo que dicen de los sectores de la clase trabajadora, que hay un sector indígena, entonces se pelean entre ellos y como son sectorizados, en fin a mí, hay varias cosas que ellos me hacen pensar. Me hacen pensar mucho. Y su chamba es muy chida. Solo que, como no es la más cool y como nice. No tiene este super diseño ni nada. Pues mucha gente no les presta atención. Entonces yo, para mí, fue importante darles el micro a ellos y más bien me faltaron programas con ellos, la verdad.

Entonces, para mí, eso fue muy lindo, con el pretexto del libro, porque la verdad, casi ni hablamos o muy poquito. Ya haber podido entrevistar, por ejemplo, a Raquel Gutiérrez. De poder pues yo hubiera [00:19:00] entrevistado a John Holloway. O sea, yo me hubiera seguido. Lo que pasa es que la chamba entrevistadora es muy distinta a la que yo hago como locutora, o sea, es otro camino. Y pues, el recurso. Pues no lo hay. Claro. Claro. Porque esa lo pudimos hasta pagar un poquitito de dinero a la gente que entrevistamos. Pudimos autocobrar un poquitito. Pagarle a la diseñadora. Fue muy distinto a todo lo que yo hago. No este ese ese programa.

Insisto por el apoyo internacionalista que poco o mucho, pues fue muy lindo tener, porque normalmente no se puede pagar entrevistas y cosas, que es chistoso tanto tanto de lucha de clases, con compas que pu pues obviamente les cuesta venir para acá.

Chris: Ya no, pues es muy difícil, pero sí, fue un episodio muy bonito. Y lo voy a poner en el sitio web d El Fin de Turismo cuando lanzamos este podcast y también por los que quieren saber, es el último episodio de Alegría Emergente. Pues, hablando de tus obras Alf [00:20:00] en Pepitas de Calabaza, exploras algunos temas periférico de turismo, desde la Merida en la que creciste, los chiqui loteros o aquellos que dividen grandes lotes en lotes pequeños para venderlos a un precio normalmente superior, a veces a extranjeros. Es uno de esos temas.

Cómo influyó tu tiempo en Merida en tu comprensión del turismo?

Alf: Primero, extender un poco la la invitación a la lectura de mi trabajo. Este el tema de la propiedad y del turismo y del colonialismo, básicamente atraviesa toda toda mi obra, pero medida en concreto que que te interesa con Pepitas también es algo que menciono en el libro nuevo.

Él No Existe Dique Capaz de Contar y hablo específicamente de cómo el turismo, la industria del turismo ha ido como arrebatándonos a quienes venimos de las clases populares. Crecimos abajo y demás, sobre todo el placer, el ocio. Olvídate de la [00:21:00] tierra. Si el acceso al agua, una serie de cosas, no.

Entonces ahí se trabaja un poco más elabor adamente pero efectivamente desde Pepitas. Pues a mí, es un tema que me, central en mi trabajo. El tema del colonialismo, porque para mí, hablar de turismo se hablar de colonialismo actual, colonialismo interno externo, pero es el colorismo vigente. O sea, es un desplazamiento, parte de un proceso de desplazamiento em.

Entonces, en Pepitas, pues efectivamente eso es un protagonista, que digamos es el burgués nacional, por decirlo como muy teóricamente el chiquilotero, le decimos regionalmente, que es el es el terrateniente. No es Carlos Slim. O sea, no es el más rico, el lo rico, pero es, digamos, el terrateniente de mediano alcance que puede comprar tierra y fragmentarla y venderla, especular con la tierra, al final. Pero en el sur resiste, el año pasado, para para subir el tono a lo político otra vez... El el año pasado en el sur [00:22:00] resiste, nos decía el Congreso Nacional Indígena, que la mitad de la tierra en México es propiedad social, no? Y esto lo platicaba presentando no Existe Dique con Yasnaya Aguilar porque Oaxaca es un caso distinto y da mucha envidia.

Tiene una tercera forma de tierra que en la tierra comunal, pero no vamos entrar a las legalidades. El sureste de México, como representa a Paco y hablo en mi segundo libro también este de ah, el turismo ha entrado porque legalmente, desde el 92 se cambió la constitución y se ha roto la propiedad ejidal y ha entrado la propiedad privada, no?

Entonces, para llevarlo lo meramente político, luchar en contra del turismo hoy en México sería exigir que no se pueda vender, como en Oaxaca existe la propiedad comunal, no en ninguna otra parte del país hasta donde yo sé, que no se pueda legalmente vender esa tierra. Entonces, para no abstraer, o sea para ir a concreto, el turismo avanza, por el primermundista, coludido con [00:23:00] con con el tercermundista de la clase alta, en este caso, Paco, para romper la la propiedad social y meter la propiedad individual o privada, no? Si hubiera un mecanismo que la revolución mexicana nos heredó, ese mecanismo legal no podría existir el turismo en México, por lo menos no legalmente.

Entonces, como desde el 92, se terminó de caer lo que nos quedaba de revolucion mexicana y que se peleó a balazos. Hay que recuperar esa negativa. En el 92 se cambia, es perdemos eso que habíamos ganado la revolución. Y entonces el turismo ya explotan. Y eso es muy notorio para gente que somos del sur.

O sea, si yo te cuento cómo fui a Tulum por primera vez, y cuando volví a Tulum 10 o 20 anos después, o cómo fui a Zipolite por primera vez. Y eso es el resultado. O sea, te puedo escribir 30 libros, pero todo eso es result resultado específicamente una partecita de la constitución que menciona en mi segundo libre, legal, que permitió destruirlo lo que ganamos en la revolución mexicana, [00:24:00] que es la propiedad colectiva, en algunos casos propiedad indígena en otros casos, simplemente propiedad social de las clases populares.

Y esto lo he trado mucha gente y me fui enterando estando con la gente en territorio, por ejemplo, con la asamblea de defensores de territorio Maya Muuch Xiinbal, ellos en la práctica, me enseñaron toda esta serie de mecanismos y defensas caminando con los pueblos, estando ahí. O sea, porque hay que estar ahí a veces para entender la magnitud.

O sea, si tú lo piensas, el los muchos pueblos indígenas y clases populares son dueñas de hectáreas, el 40% del país, está en sus manos a nivel de propiedad legal, pero la propiedad privada va ganando, no, no. Y para mí, el turismo solo es un pedacito de ese proyecto colonizador actual, que va, va quitándonos, lo poquito que ganamos en la revolución mexicana. Bueno, ganamos varias cosas: la educación pública, salud pública, todo eso lo van privatizando. Pero es muy loco tierra y territorio, porque es muy específico. O sea 40 percent versus [00:25:00] 60 percent, un artículo de constitución, no hay que perdernos, osea. Ahí está. Pero mira el ombligo del pedo. Ajá.

Chris: Mm, gracias. Me gustaría proponer algunos algunas preguntas, algunas provocaciones. Quizás respeto de cómo el turismo y más bien, más recientemente, las entrecomillas invasiones de turistas, nómadas digitales a México desde la pandemia y otras partes también. O sea, no es solo México, pero obviamente hay otros lugares.

Y pues, hay ciertas cosas que ha surgido en otros episodios de podcast, respeto de el radicalismo rígido, y como lo veo a veces culturas de descartabilidad, que siento que es algo fundamental y también como desconocido en cómo funciona, pues la modernidad, la colonia, toda ese trayectoria [00:26:00] de mierda.

Pero lo vemos mucho. Siento, siento yo en los redes sociales. Entonces, me gustaría preguntarte, qué piensas sobre los efectos de las redes sociales en los contextos de las luchas contemporáneas, pero también bajo de este contexto de turismo, de las invasiones en México. Entonces mi pregunta es, cómo crees que las redes sociales contribuyen al radicalismo rígido?

Alf: Eh? Pues mira, yo creo que no solo contribuyen radicalismo rígido, o sea, respondiendo muy rápidamente. Yo creo que el algoritmo está diseñado y eso lo sabe la mayoría, espero, supongo este para generar estos echo-chambers que le llaman. Entonces, yo creo que lo mínimo, o sea, lo más x es que genere radicalismo rígido yo creo que en realidad la [00:27:00] ultraderecha está ganando en el mundo por las redes sociales. Y esto no lo digo yo. Esto está demostradisimo. O sea, Milei, Trump y todo el fascismo en el poder que desgraciadamente es, yo calculo la mitad del planeta, Bukele, etcétera, Bolsonaro, tienen mucho que ver con lo que aquí sería Chumel Torres, con lo que aquí sería Eduardo Verastegui. Tiene todo que ver, no?

Y yo creo que eso, el pensamiento crítico, como le nos queremos llamar a este el otro lado antifascista sea, no hemos tomado suficientemente en serio eso como un enemigo, no? Porque volviendo la negatividad, el resentimiento, pues hay ese es un nuevo enemigo. Para mí, hay que destruirlo este.

Acomodé lugar, o sea, como tenga que hacer. Entonces, esto lo hablaba también con Benja, la pareja de Yasnaya, el día de mi presentación en Volcana. O sea, qué pasa que mucha izquierda, mucho pensamiento crítico y todo, no quiere hacer pop. Entonces la derecha sí que está haciendo [00:28:00] pop y por eso ganó Trump, y por eso está Milei en el poder, porque hacen un un tipo de redes sociales poperas.

No tienen miedo a reducir el pensamiento, a provocar. No tienen miedo porque tienen el poder, obviamente, controlan el mundo. En concreto, Trump, no? Entonces, nosotras desde el miedo y desde un un clasicismo extraño, un machismo raro, como que decimos el "pop" está mal porque reduce.

Ser influencer está mal porque hace de lo abstracto. Lo reduce. Lo simplifica. Y ese es un problema. Es un problema grande que tiene que para mí tiene que ver con el problema de la es escolarización. Pero para contestarte, y yo creo que las redes sociales sostienen al fascismo actual, más que cualquier otra cosa, yo creo que más que ninguna otra cosa. Y por eso nos gobiernan celebridades y estamos en una fase nueva de la política como espectáculo. Y no estábamos ahí, volvemos a militancia como un libro que ya no responde a esta época, yo no siento que Obama era eso.

Yo no [00:29:00] siento que el PRIismo y el PANismo era eso. Estamos en otro momento, entonces, como siempre la izquierda o como lo quieras llamar, el pensamiento, el antifascismo general, que a mi me da igual los conceptos, como siempre estamos lentas, lentas en reaccionar. Porque? Pues porque nos asusta.

Las redes sociales, yo pienso que nos están bombardeando, emocionalmente con el genocidio. Yo creo que la manera en que están manejando la imagen del genocidio está tronando la salud mental, terminando de tronar, si no, es que ya la había tronado de buena parte de de de quienes estamos contra de Trump y Milei, por decir el amor que yo espero que seamos más o de la mitad de la tierra otra vez, este me gusta creer.

Entonces eso, yo creo que estamos lentas porque quieren ellos porque nos han tronado la la salud mental. Y eso hace que nos aletargamos en responder con la fuerza con la que ellos, o sea nos faltan influencers un poco más rudos, para decirlo como es, o sea un poco más tan fuertes y provocadores como ellos.

Yo [00:30:00] siento que los influencers de este lado hacen un trabajo importante, pero muy suave. O sea, está muy abajito. Muy bien portado. Cuando tú escuchas a Bukele, tú escuchas hablar a Milei o Trump y son los provocadores, realmente. Este, no le tienen miedo a decir pendejadas. Y la izquierda, sí. Sí, le tienen miedo a cagarla.

Cuando no se dan cuenta que lo que están haciendo ellos es provocar para mover, no? O sea, la gente sabe que es una exageración. Los votantes de Milei de Bukele y de Trump saben que dicen mucha, es un borracho, que está diciendo pendejadas, pero van y votan.

Chris: Claro.

Alf: La izquierda no está logrando subir el tono.

Al revés. O sea, entre más, baja en el fondo y más banderitas de palestina, como que más bien portadas, somos. Y entonces, ah, "pues vamos a hablar de la cultura de palestina, que es muy importante. Es muy bonita. Pero yo te apuesto que se hubieran influencers diciendo vamos a tirarles bombas y vamos a matar sería más fuerte, no? O sea, le daría [00:31:00] miedo a ellos como ha pasar, si ha pasado la historia en los 70. Esto sí que pasó. Si le dábamos miedo a ellos. Ya no le damos miedo. Y yo creo que eso tiene todo que ver con como el imperialismo hoy, es un algoritmo. Antes era otra cosa, y es un imperialismo de la mente y de las emociones.

Y es meramente como manejan la imagen. Osea, da igual lo que nos muestren, sino la manera en que se utiliza el discurso de Trump y la manera en que se utiliza la imagen del genocidio, no el genocidio. Eso a ellos no les importa, sino el uso, nos truenan, nos truenan todo el tiempo.

Entonces no logramos articular. No logramos reconocernos. Empezamos a competir, nos peleamos y es porque ellos van ganando. Han habido otros momentos de la historia donde este lado de veras le daba miedo sin idealizarlo porque también puede ser muy machista. Este le daba miedo a Trump y a los Trumps. O sea, se [00:32:00] cagaban de me decían no, no.

Entonces, bueno, van a matar, no? Y entonces, había algo positivo ahí. Había algo positivo ahí y eso se perdió, nuestra propia capacidad de dar miedo y defendernos. Se ha ido perdiendo. O sea, y es muy material, porque matan defensores del territorio cada semana, así como palestinos y libaneses con la misma pistola, la misma arma. Cada semana los matan.

Entonces, pues, claro que da miedo de subir el tono. No porque siento que te van a matar. Hay un fantasma. Entonces, yo creo que las redes sociales se tienen toda la culpa y que están gestionadas maravillosas, perfectas, las redes sociales y y el internet porque permitió que el imperialismo, se vuelva.

O sea que lo cargues a todos lados, que desees el fascismo. Y eso está en las pantallitas y en el celular. Lo manejaron muy bien. El que lo explica más bastante bien es, Adam Curtis, en Can't Get You Outta My Head. Y creo que eso hay que tomarlo [00:33:00] todavía más enserio, porque la gente nada más dice "ah, pinche Chumel Torres". No, wey. O sea, es el cáncer de esta sociedad. O sea, no se explicar. Es un verdadero enemigo y "ah x solo es un panista ahí raro." Lo que quiero decir es que no le damos la seriedad, como que no estamos leyendo el imperio en su nueva fase y cómo se maneja.

Chris: Pero entonces, tú crees que las maneras que podemos socovar el algoritmo es de, quitarnos de la pantalla? O sea, pero cómo está también el algoritmo no solo internalizándose según yo en los movimientos, pero en las mentalidades de la gente y dentro de los movimientos?

Alf: Claro que yo no tengo una respuesta, pero a mí se me ocurre que esto ya se intentado muchas veces como crear nuestros propios tecnologías. Lo que pasa es que nunca van a ser igual de atractivas y poderosas, como clase de quienes controlan la tierra, porque pues por algo [00:34:00] las controlan y van ganando no? Porque tienen todos los recursos y toda la inteligencia puesta ahí

Entonces, si los movimientos ya les pueden tener redes sociales, pero pero sus posts no tienen ningún alcance y eso está gestionado desde arriba. Entonces este es un problema más profundo que tiene que ver con el problema de la imagen y su gestión. O sea, al controlar el algoritmo, el imperio, lo que está controlando son las imágenes y las narrativas. Las gestionan, a eso me refiero con imperialismo. O sea, vemos lo que el imperio quiere que veamos y se acabó. O sea, es una nueva fase porque no necesariamente tienes al gringo gobernando a tu país como lo fue antes de la revoluciones nacionales, por ejemplo, pero tienes el celular que sólo te va a mostrar lo que le conviene al gobierno gringo o mayoritariamente.

Entonces quebrar el algoritmo es quebrar el imperio, o sea la verdad, o sea, no es otra cosa que eso . Y eso hace que lo [00:35:00] cool sea cool y lo no cool que suele ser más importante, no se vea y no tenga acceso recursos y no generar imágenes chidas. Y si logras de una imagen, no tiene ningún alcance. O sea, es muy notorio para mi trabajo.

O sea, si yo subo mi gatito 500 views, si yo subo el tipo de cosas que estamos platicando 5. Sí, claro. Es super evidente, no el manejo de la imagen y la gestión. Entonces, pues hay que volver. Hay que volver a la auto publicación. Hay que volver a los medios libres como se estuvieron haciendo hasta si varias decadas. O sea, y rehacerlo recuperarlos, repensarlos.

La gente que se está yendo a Mastodon en redes sociales. La gente que se está saliendo de los algoritmos, los más feos. Digo, no sé qué tanto lo vamos a lograr. O sea, por eso yo, mi parte política, la vivo más en presencial. O sea, yo voy. Trato de ir ahora que se cumplen 50 años de Lucio cada año, hacer pueblo, estar con el pueblo, ser pueblo. O sea, porque [00:36:00] claro que si yo no voy, nunca me voy a enterar.

Y si no camino con, como te conté, la asamblea maya, aunque sea cinco minutos, yo no me entero de que el pedo principal de todo esto es simplemente un artículo de la constitución, no? Entonces, o sea, pon tú que ellos postan en internet. Quién lo escucha? Nadie muy poca gente, pero eso es por quien controla.

Que la info no llegue no. Entonces, claro. Entonces a eso voy, o sea, hay un problema con la imagen. O sea, hay un gran problema con la imagen porque también lo que la ultra derecho y el fascismo ha logrado perfectamente bien en nuestra época. Es que la gente prefiere el reconocimiento y el like, el premio no que la reparación real.

Y entonces las redes sociales están basadas en un nuevo modelo de contra insurgencia y de pacificación y neutralización política, que es, yo voy, te doy un premio, yo voy y te muestro, yo te doy un like, pero para que ya te calles, no. Y para que no digas las cosas, [00:37:00] estamos decían, es un solo artículo.

Si echamos para atrás de artículo, pues vamos a parar buena parte de los capitales colonialistas y turísticos hoy, etc. O sea a lo que voy es que van y te premian, van y te likean para que te vayas pacificando. Y ahí hubo un cambio estrategia que también estamos muy lentas en sí, porque los setentas te mataban, a las clases medias organizadas políticamente. Hoy no. Hoy no es así.

Hoy matan a la gente de abajo, a los defensores que viven y habitan las clases populares, el territo y a la clase media la premia pa que te calles. Entonces, cómo te premian haciendo que el algoritmo te vea mucho y hables mucho y produzcas mucho contenido, pero es un contenido. Te repito muy bien portado.

Es un contenido suave, que omite las partes políticas que omite temas de imperialismo contra insurgencia, bla, bla, osea. Habla de todo lo demás, formas de vida, ternura radical, [00:38:00] consumo alternativo, sororidad solidaria, todo lo que tú quieras, excepto si no le cortamos la cabeza a Trump, esa condición no para. O sea, no sé si me explico.

Menos lo más importante, digo, lo estoy caricaturizando. Cortando la cabeza de Trump no vamos a parar el periodismo, pero me estás entendiendo. Están manejando la censura y estamos ya hablan de tecno tecnofeudalismo. Estamos regalándole un contenido que soporta el imperialismo y no nos damos... estamos tan enajenadas en este momento con el algoritmo que trabajamos para el gratis.

No? Y me incluye, o sea mis PDFs, son gratis. Mi radio es gratis. Yo soy una esclava del internet y se acabó, no? Y entonces, en la medida en que no lo sepamos, sentir la negatividad de ese despojo y de cómo todas trabajamos para el imperio. Nos gusta no poco mucho, este pues más nos enajenamos no? O sea, porque yo no cobro por mis ramas de radio.

Yo no cobro por el PDF [00:39:00] literal. Me despoja y me precariza en un sentido duro, directo. El pedo es que decirlo es fuerte porque la gente, pues como escucha en tu programa o el mío, y nos va MXN $5. Bien, pues la gente se compra la amiga y dice que padre, el internet me ven. Cuando solo te está viendo la gente que piensa como tú.

Y ya nadie más. O sea, ni un solo seguidor más. Gente que ya pensaba como tú, antes de llegar a tu contenido. Entonces, en realidad no estamos logrando hacer propaganda, no? Y yo creo que es super importante, porque porque en la medida siempre trabajamos con los que piensan como nosotras, no estamos empujando el ese 50 percent fascista, al reves, lo respetamos y decimos, bueno, yo trabajo con el 50%. Me quedo en el 40% de la propiedad social y nunca empujo la propiedad privada o el 50% fascista.

Y ya ahí te quedas que es muy cómodo también hablar entre nosotras. Pues que nadie te también te madres que nadie te mande [00:40:00] bots. Porque a mí lo que hacen es que me atacan en internet, no? Entonces, cada vez que digo lo que hay que decir, pues me mandan bots y me asustan me, como mucha gente, no, te amenazan.

Y todos eso esta perfectamente gestionado, en México desde Peña Nieto, del Peña bots. Se siente muy claramente esas tecnologías. Muchas veces israeles. Se siente muy clarito, no? Y funcionan perfectamente bien, porque pacifican y neutralizan maravillosamente. Ya la gente deja de lo que hay que decir porque tú sientes que... o sea, porque tú sientes lo general, el efecto contrario, las censuras se siente como premiO

Chris: total. Muchas gracias. Alf. me gustaría provocar un poco ese idea que la algoritmo sólo nos este en suavece. En suaveza, dijiste? En suavece. Ajá. Ajá, porque pues, [00:41:00] también a mí parece que algoritmo está pidiendo, metiendo, reforzando la rabia.

Y hace hace poco descubrí, descubrí un libro llamado Discard Studies en inglés, Estudios de Descarte, que intenta formular hipótesis no solo en torno a las historias sociales de la basura y contaminación, pero sino también del exilio y desplazamiento. Y la idea en los estudios del descarte es que todas estas cosas están muy relacionadas entre sí.

Las redes sociales creen una plataforma para los también expulsiones sociales en forma de cancelaciones o escrachees, por ejemplo.

Alf: Mm-hmm.

Chris: Entonces, también que si el el algo ritmo está imponiendo, invitándonos a ser más pacíficos, siento que hay una manera que está imponiendo, impulsando, invitándonos a descartar, tirar, la [00:42:00] gente entre los movimientos sociales, o sea, entre movimientos sociales, también en la manera interpersonal.

Y quería preguntarte sobre eso y las consecuencias a las luchas de largo plazo.

Alf: Mm-hmm. Mira, yo siento que si se habló particularmente en el segundo capítulo de Alegria Emergente con un invitado que se llama Tomás Calles. Con él, se habló eso. Mira, yo siento que que es bien complicado este tema, porque para mí, el escrache pues que últimamente más sé hoy es el escrache que llegar con el género, con abuso sexual. Y a la vez, yo creo que hay que hacerle su genealogía completa el escrache porque el escrache cada vez... o sea, si lo sacamos de género y lo metemos a la política, clase, a raza, y a todo lo demás, este de si tú te das cuenta, todo el tiempo, volviendo al 50 facho y al no facho, el 50% facho ha estrechado al 50% no facho.

Todo este es el tema del control de las narrativas y las imagenes. O sea, [00:43:00] si tú ves la imagen, por ejemplo y para mí, es una forma de escracheeo pre nuestra época. Si tú ves como Estados Unidos, creo la imagen de Cuba, es una forma de escrache, no? O sea, como, voy a hablar super mal de esos wey. Voy a decir. Voy a publicar todos los libros y todos los contenidos que hablen mal de Cuba, no?

Y para mí, hay un escracheeo ahí, un pre escracheeo, por decir así. Entonces, en términos políticos, que te vuelvo a decir que siento que son los cabezas, nos faltan en toda esta discusión. Siempre ha existido y va a existir formas de manipular y de destruir cuando la gente está haciendo cosas más o menos chidas, pues te van a buscar dónde y ahí te van a chingar, no?

Y el gobierno también participa eso con sus bots, no? Y su manejo de la información, de la distribución de la información en concreto. Entonces, yo siento que el escrache hay que verlo como también como parte de la contra insurgencia, no todos los escrachees, porque hay escrachees que, por ejemplo, no se vuelven públicos y se vuelven en procesos, por ejemplo, [00:44:00] de... o sea, no es la denuncia pública el punitivismo como ejercicio de castigo ejemplar público, hay escrachees o denuncias en concreto, que más bien se vuelven en ejercicios de justicia reparativa, puertas cerrada, que han sido efectivos.

Y yo me he enterado de varios y me han invitado a varios procesos. Este y con varios movimientos. Yo me he dado cuenta de la justicia ejercía por nosotras mismas. Sí, llevada a cabo reparar cosas concretas con soluciones concretas sin hacer una imagen, sin darle al algoritmo lo que nos quita todo el tiempo - tiempo, energía, sin darle la fotita donde dice "para hacer tu eescrache chido habla..."

o sea, simplemente resolver, es lo que muchas cosas en internet no hacen. Hablan pero no acciones, y tú puedes hablar lo que quieres siempre y cuando no actúes. Ese es el gran truco de la red social. No hablemos todo, mientras no cambiemos nada.

Este entonces nada. Yo siento que el escrache pues hay que verlo así como, tiene una parte [00:45:00] chida para mí, sobre todo a puerta cerrada, como de procesos que yo llamaría, justicia reparativa, restaurativa, osea que no tienden a la imagen, puede crear una imagen, pero no es su fin su objetivo final, sino reparar daños específicos con soluciones específicas, no caso por caso, sin abstraer a ese, este versus un tipo de escrache liberal, blanqueado, espectacular, chafa, que lo único que ha hecho es contra insurgencia. Cada vez que hay liderazgos. "Ah, es un macho," no? Cada vez que hay movimiento sociales, "ah, trabajan para los rusos, trabajan para los chinos, este, reciben dinero, reciben dinero de tal, este." Ose y el escrache, si es una de las mejores herramientas, porque genera volvemos en el tema de narrativas y imágenes, no que contraponen lo que ha ganado.

Osea, yo te voy a dar un fondo a ti como activista para que hables del turismo, todo lo que tú quieras, siempre y cuando no hables de esto y de esto, okey, [00:46:00] entonces tu envía a cobrar y te va a super bien. Y te voy el súper famoso y que chido.

Pues esa es la lucha que nos vaya bien materialmente a todas. Pero a ti te censuraron. Te dijeron sólo hablas de, entonces, fíjate, volvimos al tema del escrache. O sea mucha de esa gente eescracheada. Voy a poner uno. Miguel Peralta. El caso de Miguel Peralta, para mí sería un caso de escrache, no este Miguel Peralta hoy está perseguido por el estado mexicano y mucha gente te va a decir que es un machista. Te va a decir muchas cosas, pero no te va a decir la otra parte, no? La parte política de su lucha, contra un gobierno que el gobierna, por no decir Samir Flores como un escrache, por no decir Hortensia Telesforo con un tipo de escrache.

O sea, si me estás cachando? O sea, y entonces que pasa que que desde arriba, como controla la narrativa y controlan la imagen y la distribución de la información. Te dicen a ver, yo te voy a pagar por una cosa, pero cállate la otra.

Entonces pon la banderita de colores. Y ya CDMX es gay y es trans, [00:47:00] pero nunca vuelves a hablar de clase social.

Por favor que el pobre siga siendo pobre. Ella solo habla Alf de trans, no? Si te das cuenta, es como el escrache. O sea, el escrache dice vamos a destruir el liderazgo político de Miguel Peralta poniendo ultra énfasis en su lado machista, que que yo no dudo que haya tenido como muchos líderes y como mucha gente, o sea, yo no estoy diciendo que no, solo estoy diciendo la manera en que se utiliza ese tipo de denuncias es para destruir el lado político. Muchas veces no todas. Mm, pero para poner un solo caso, y hoy, por hoy te estoy hablando de un caso de criminalizacion actual, como podríamos hablar de Samir Flores o Hortensia Telesforo y toda la contrainsurgencia. La contrainsurgencia es un tipo de escrache. Es que eso ya cambió.

También te repito, la gente más visible van y le dan premios y le dan atención. A la gente menos visible, la matan o la criminalizan como Miguel. Están a punto de meterlo a la cárcel 50 años si no le prestamos atención [00:48:00] a ese caso, no? Que es lo que quieren, que no le prestamos atención. Entonces a eso voy, o sea, casi que ni importa el crimen, casi que no importa la falta del daño, sino el manejo.

Hay como una economía, fíjate, hasta te diría yo, una economía de las quejas y una economía de la imagen que no estamos siendo conscientes. Estamos tan alejanadas, que nos vamos, por lo primero que nos dan "Ah, ese ese wey era un macho." Listo. Todo quedó o ese wey trabajo para china y hasta todo el trabajo que haya hecho, como trabaja para china, o como hablan de, por ejemplo, piensan las narrativas sobre ve Venezuela y Nicaragua y Cuba.

O sea, es impresionante. Es escrache, o sea. Quién te va a hablar bien de ese tipo de países? Está difícilisimo

Chris: o o al menos decir como, "no sé, no sé"...

Alf: o al menos decir, "no sé," pero lo que quiero decir es que el independientemente lo que han hecho Venezuela y los machismos de izquierda, [00:49:00] el manejo de ese error.

O sea, supongo, sí, yo creo que comete errores como toda la gente cometemos. El manejo es la parte más como las redes sociales, la distribución de esa información, es la que a mí me preocupa más. O sea, como, solo vamos a hablar de lo mierda, déjate claro, porque a Estados Unidos le conviene, que Miguel Peralta está en la cárcel, que Venezuela solo se una mierda, que China solo se una... que yo no dudo que tiene un lado de mierda, pero es interesante los límites del discurso.

No puedes hablar de lo hecho. En el momento en el que dice es algo bueno. Cancelada. A la cárcel. Se acabó el pedo. Entonces a mí eso me llama la atención, porque la gente cree que es un momento de libertad discursiva. El fascismo va ganando, no? O sea, y eso es Trump, pero y eso es el genocidio Palestino y Libanes.

Pero pero pero hay un síntoma de eso en que no podemos, no podemos hablar.

Yo siento que el [00:50:00] internet es mucho más facho que lo previo. O sea, yo me siento mucho más censurada que lo que yo veo que ha pasado en el siglo 20. Me explico? La verdad. O sea, yo veo los discursos del Che Guevara y digo no, pues en ese tiempo podías hablar.

Habla así hoy, balazo en la frente. Así es fácil. No amaneciste. Te desapareceria. Entonces digo, ganamos o perdimos en términos discursivos? No, yo pienso que perdimos porque tu ves la tele el siglo 20 y está hablaba sin que le den un balazo. Hoy, ya no hoy. Samir habló, lo mató Morena. Ya. Listo. O sea, hoy hablaban los Palestinos todos muertos.

O sea, entonces yo creo que perdimos con internet. No ganamos, pero yo pienso que el turismo te repito, o sea, y el colonialismo, entonces solo es como una partecita. Sinceramente, yo pienso que es como un pedazo chiquitito, de todo una cosa más grande. Claro que es una industria que ha [00:51:00] ido ganando mucha fuerza, pero para mí se habría un contra turismo y un peregrinaje.

Yo siento que hago peregrinaje. Fíjate, qué es lo que destruyó el o el turismo está reedificando cuando trato de acercarme los movimientos sociales, desde mi clase, o sea, desde mi color piel y todos mis contradicciones. Pues yo sigo a veces caminando, con gente que me ha enseñado cosas que nunca van a salir en el celular.

Adrede no sabemos la verdad. Aunque las posten, no me van a llegar. Y entonces yo creo que si hay un contraturismo y un yo pienso que tendríamos que ir a buscar en el tema del peregrinaje o la hospitalidad radical . Por qué? Porque había un tema sagrado, no? O sea, había algo sagrado en el peregrino. No era turismo nada más de placer, aunque tenía a su lado del compartir y ocioso, pero para mí se recuperáramos la capacidad de defendernos, varias cosas que nos han quitado, la capacidad de hablar que yo creo que nos la quitaran a base de premios y views, no a base de castigos, pues habría un [00:52:00] peregrinaje, por el lado político, no?.

Por ejemplo, me cuentan que el año que viene va haber en Brasil. No, mucha gente va a estar yendo a Brasil de diferentes latitudes. Y ese para mí, eso es contra turismo y peregrinaje político sagrado. No. Entonces la gente va o el Anticop, vas, o sea, el ir es súper importante porque tiras el suelo de la basura y estás cuerpo a cuerpo con una realidad que que el algoritmo imperialista quiere que no nos llegue, tu salir. Claro. El problema es que te insista. Está tan de moda, "muerte al turismo," que no es fácil hablar de que hay contraturismos muy importantes. Siempre lo han habido no? O sea, cuando los zapatistas dicen vengan, pasan cosas que no pasan.

O sea que hay que ir, no. A huevo, hay que ir. Entonces, y eso es un contraturismo. Y el zapatista está super consciente. No viene puro gringo aquí, puros güerito. Cuál es el pedo así se politizan. Sí, yo creo que es más de clase media no tratar de [00:53:00] buscarle la deriva y darle la vuelta a la industria. Mmm. Y simplemente decir merte a todo el turismo. Pues sí, en la teoría suena muy bien, pero en lo práctica va ganando.

Chris: Mmm, claro, y así pues me gustaría preguntarte también de ese hospitalidad radical, pero siento que muchos caen intentar a definir lo que es.

Pero entonces me gustaría nada más de preguntarte igual de peregrinaje, si quieres, de si has en tus viajes o en casa, o sea en tu colonia barrio, encontrado lo que llamarías tu hospitalidad radical, en el camino.

Alf: Mira yo, esto es algo que aprendí. O sea lo que lo que llama hospitalidad radical es algo que yo hice en la práctica toda mi vida y solo después empecé a elaborar. Pues yo me moví toda mi vida y me sigo moviendo principalmente en el underground.

Queda de contracultura. Y pero por ejemplo, yo en el punk, en las [00:54:00] patinetas, como en la izquierda radical en general, con todas sus ramas, toda la vida, he ido y han venido.

Y mi casa siempre ha sido la casa de mucha gente y es una práctica que no me había sentado a pensar, no?. Ese no quedarse en el hotel, ese tú llevar a la gente a pasear y mostrarle los lugares ocultos de la ciudad, no los lugares como limpios y en inglés. O sea, es algo que en el Punk y en el anarquismo de esas cosas está muy metido, no?

Y yo tengo casa en muchos lugares del mundo porque también he dado casa a mucha gente de muchos lugares del mundo, desde muy chavita, desde tours de skate cuando tenía 14 años, llegaba gente de todos lados y se quedaban en mi casa y yo no me daba cuenta de que es algo, que si tú te vas al peregrinaje, la hospitalidad radical o como queremos llamar, a lo previo a los boom's inmobiliarios, turísticos. Pues siempre existió no? Siempre he existido, no? Entonces nada. Para mí es raro hablarlo porque porque para mí, no se cuestiona, no? O sea, yo recibo gente todo el tiempo y me [00:55:00] recibe gente todo el tiempo de de mucho. Últimamente ya se hizo más internacional. Pero antes era más entre pues, las sociedades chiquitas, lo que sea.

Entonces yo te podía contar toda mi historia, a partir de ese eje, si tú quieres. Pero pero mi punto es que es una práctica que yo tengo integrada. O sea, no, nunca me la cuestioné. O sea, y yo como mucho lo que queda en la contracultura, lo que queda underground o sea, mucha gente así lo vive este. Y cada vez que a mí me invita, por ejemplo, la última vez que me invitaron a un pueblo, fue Yasnaya, que ya habíamos quedado de ir.

Porque el programa lo escuchan los Mixes y todo. Y yo le dije "claro que sí." O sea a mí en el momento en que me digas cuando voy, yo voy. Y para mí hay algo, o sea, tiene que venir de un pueblo como el Mixe, la invitación para que no sea turismo. Para mí, tiene que haber un receptor explícito y una invitación. O sea, es parte de la economía del regalo y esas cosas que, que en los sures siempre hemos hecho y en el abajo siempre hemos hecho consciente o inconscientemente.

Creo que ahora hay que empezar [00:56:00] a elaborarla también. Ahora que empezar a teorizarlo y pensarlo porque conforme avanza, la propiedad privada de la colonización, pues se va perdiendo esos comunalismos, porque son prácticas que los pueblos tienen, que las clases populares tienen, que los undergrounds. La gente se mueve todo el tiempo, todo el tiempo.

Solo no se mueve de maneras fancy y y cool. O sea, la foto no es la bonita del Instagram. Entonces, por lo tanto, esa práctica que a mí lo interesa es la práctica, no tanto la conceptualización o la imagen. Pues no la logramos reproducir y va ganando el turismo comercial. Por darte otro ejemplo, varios pueblos en el sureste también me hablaban de turismo alternativo.

Y, por ejemplo, armaban varias cosas con los pueblos alrededor pidiéndole permiso, volviendo al al 40% de la propiedad social y esa parte la constitución que habría que pedir que nos regresen, le pedían permiso a todos los ejidos. Entonces ibas en bici o pajareando [00:57:00] las cosas que hacen turismo normal, pero hablaban con los dueños de los ejidos con el de la propiedad social que yo y los zapatistas y mucha gente defendemos y le decían bueno, "voy a traer gringos que que como quieren que le hagamos. Pues da tu caguama" o "cuánto les vas a cobrar?" Y para mí es contraturismo, fíjate, y caminando con ellos en esos territorios.

Lo aprendes. O sea, escuchando programas de radio y leyendo libros va a estar cabrón. O sea, hay que ir, no este y fíjate que interesante, porque ese 40% de esa propiedad social, pues bien, que podría recibir la lana, que se le da el hotel? No? Porque mucha de esta gente está muy precarizada, entonces no simplemente decir "ah, a la verga, el dinero en el turismo," sino a quien se lo damos y por qué.

Cuando fíjate, yo veo en los pueblos ya iniciativas muy chidas de redistribución para este lado. Hay un montón de cooperativas muy chidas que redistribuyen lo opuesto a lo que hay un hotel. Pero volvemos al tema, pues como "no [00:58:00] son cool" y no tienen el diseño más chido y y no son influencers."

Pues nadie se entera que que hay prácticas comunalistas que incluyen la movilidad de entre pueblos y entre personas muy chidas. O sea, la verdad. Yo he visto muchas proyectos de cooperativismo contraturístico increíbles.

Entonces, bueno, eso. La gente que hace caminantes informativas, como pedagogías de caminantes como contraturísticas. Hay un montón de gente y un montón de cosas, historiadores radicales, ahí que hacen sus sus contradiscursos y llevan a la gente. Osea, yo creo que hay muchas, para mi, hay mucha esperanza ahí.

Lo que pasa es que no la conectamos. O sea justo el algoritmo hace que no la alcances a ver y que te quedes, o sea, esa información, pon tu que la postan, no te va a llegar, no? O sea, está diseñado pa que no te llegue. Entonces, pero hay un montón de cosas muy chidas. Yo no vivo esa [00:59:00] distopia triste, que mucha gente vive de "yo valio verga".

"Hay que dejar de movernos." Yo no lo vivo. Tampoco hay que ultra movernos. Yo pienso que el nomadismo en la clase media ya es una forma de de despojo también. Hay como no forzado en las clases medias. No abajo. Pero bueno, yo no lo vivo con esta doom ccomo sea. Condena. O sea, como de, ah, todo movimiento está de la verga, que hay gente muy esencialista que tu dice. "Todo turismo es una mierda."

Y diría, bueno, pues vives con mucha culpa. Wey está muy bien. Se llama catolicismo. Y y lo conozco muy bien. Hay otras formas. O sea sin tanta culpa, le puedes dar tu lana a gente chida y no va a solucionar el problema, pero vaya que está más chido que dárselo al hotel y al colonialista y al que rompió la propiedad social.

O sea, estás si algo haces, no es mínimo, pero algo haces. Pues eso a mi me ha tocado ver cositas que digo bueno, aquí hay algo no, [01:00:00] aquí hay algo. Pasa que también muchas veces iniciativas como rechazan "lo cool" no quieren ser muy visibles y no quieren ser muy famosas, pues ahí es el problema del comercio justo y el comercio alternativo, que busca, busca hacer un poco invisible a veces.

Eso es problemático, no? Porque entonces, como mandamos a la banda con la banda chida, si la banda chida no quiere que le manden banda siempre. O sea, no quiere hacer negocio, no quiere hacer negocio porque se vuelve capitalistas. En fin. Pero ese, ese es otro problema, no el problema del cooperativismo.

Chris: Claro. Ya pues, sobrebordando con temas y plática hermosa, Alf, pero si puedo antes de de terminar, me gustaría preguntarte sobre tu nuevo libro. No Existe Dique Capaz de Contener al Océano Furioso. Nos podrías contar un poco de que trata y cómo tus trabajos anteriores han influido en [01:01:00] ese nuevo?

Alf: Sí,

Chris: has mencionado un poquito, pero

Alf: ajá. Este es un libro que que pueden comprar en varias librerías Volcana, en Polilla y ahí donde estás con don Gregorio, pronto queremos tener en Jícara, en Utópicas, en casa Casa Tomada y conmigo en internet, y lo pueden descargar en el PDF.

Envíos. Yo hago también a todo el mundo. Pero, bueno, es un libro que básicamente, para decirlo en una frase, es mi experiencia y mi elaboración sobre el anarquismo o la izquierda radical en general. Básicamente. O sea, te cuenta un poco mi historia de vida y como yo lo viví, lo recibí. Y qué es lo que yo he investigado y pensado sobre una práctica?

Que en este momento la historia le podría unos ya anarquismo, pero en otro me momento se llama otras formas, pero sí, como antiautoritaria, etcétera. Entonces, el libro es eso. O sea, es un ensayo personal, pero también es un [01:02:00] ensayo político filosófico, no? Entonces van las dos. Te voy narrando mi vida, pero también te voy narrando la historia de estas ideas y cómo las hevisto, en la práctica y practicado hasta dónde he podido.

Mmm.

Chris: Pues este me voy a asegurar que esos lugares en al menos en Oaxaca y además en línea, van a estar listados en el sitio web del fin de turismo cuando lance el episodio y este, pues en nombre de nuestros oyentes Alf, me gustaría expresarte mi más sincero agradecimiento por tu disposición de acompañarnos hoy, hablar estos temas complejos y garantizar que esta disidencia tenga un lugar en el mundo.

Muchísimas gracias. Y cómo podríamos este encontrar tu trabajo en línea? O sea por redes sociales o

Alf: Si? Lamentablemente, me encantaría que no, no tuviera que ser por ahí. Pero no, no me [01:03:00] quedó de otra. Si, mi trabajo principalmente yo tengo dos libros afuera que se consiguen las librerías que mencioné.

Lo que hago como locutora se encuentra gratis en todos lados, es Un Sueño Largo Ancho y Hondo. Es u arroba @1slaaahh en varias redes sociales. Y nada le ponen ahí en internet y les va a salir gratis y como lo platicaba antes, pues todo va muy junto. Mi parte de ficción y mi parte pedagógica y política va bastante unificada.

Es más o menos la misma onda pero si, digamos lo más inmediato es escucharla lo que hago, llevo varios años haciendo, como locutora. Entonces nada más le da un click y ya está. Y les pido ahí que me den likecito que me den el porque hasta ahora no, no hay quien si, o sea, yo no trabajo para una [01:04:00] radio difusora que se encargue en mis redes y que yo nada más llegue a grabar y estaría bien a gusto, pero no, pues yo la autogestiono.

Entonces, por ahora, si es necesario, el likecito y el compartir.

Chris: Claro. Pues también esos van a estar en el sitio web de fin de turismo cuando lanza el episodio. Entonces, pues muchísimas gracias Alf.

Alf: Gracias, Chris.

Leave a comment

Subscribe now

English Transcription.

Chris: [00:00:00] Welcome to the podcast The End of Tourism, Alf. Nice to talk to you today.

Chris: I'd like to start this off by asking you where you are today and how the world looks through your eyes?

Alf: Today I am in my kitchen. I work from there. In Mexico City, in a neighborhood called Iztaccihuatl. How does the world look? Well, look, I don't have a bad view. This is not a big building, but I have a nice view, right? I mean, my view is not blocked by another building or anything. You can see a lot of plants. And well, I guess you know that I am from the provinces. So I have always felt that where I live is like a little bit of a province in the capital, because there are no such big buildings.

This one and well, from here you can see it, I forget that I'm in CDMX now, you know

Chris: Thank you. Well, you are, among other things, the author of several [00:01:00] texts, including Pepitas de Calabaza and the very recent No Existe Dique Capaz de Contenedor al Océano Furioso. You also coordinated the translation into Spanish of the English text of Militancia Alegre:

Let Resistance Bloom in Toxic Times. (or Joyful Militancy) That translation was followed by a companion podcast with Pamela Carmona titled Emerging Joy: Undoing Rigid Radicalism. So, to start, I’d like to ask you how you came across the book Joyful Militancy and what led you to translate it.

Alf: I knew that book. I tell you a little bit about it in the prologue, but I knew that book, in the United States, because I had a band. I played drums in a hardcore punk band for many, many years. And so that's how I got to the United States and being [00:02:00] in the American underground, which was an important part of my life, being in California specifically.

I found that book in a cafe and I fell in love with it. So I brought it and first I read it in English with some people and very slowly I started to work on that book, translating. That's a longer story that's right there in the prologue, but well, I've been campaigning for that book for years. There were also a series of coincidences with very kind people like Tumba a la Casa, like the Canadian authors, the rights were given to us. The people from Traficantes de Sueno got involved.

I mean, there are actually a lot of people. It's like a network of networks, that book and a series of coincidences and favors and nice gestures from many people who made it come out the way it did, really. I mean, I think it's unrepeatable, that series of factors. Aha.

Chris: Oh, cool. All right. Well, that book was originally [00:03:00] published in 2016. After reading, re-reading, and translating that text, I'm curious to know what you think has changed since then, or what major differences you've seen between the rigid radicalism described in the book in the Anglosphere or North America, Anglo-Saxon, and the Hispanic or Latin American sphere?

Alf: Well, there are many things to say, right? The part that I confirmed was that I was working on that book, eh? Because let's say that I, this year I presented that book. I mean, and it did very well in Costa Rica. It was the last one. I ran out of copies. And let's say, I finished my work with Militancia in Costa Rica two, three months ago.

It's not that much, right? I mean, after the radio show with Pamela, it was presented in Costa Rica and it went very well, eh? And it was [00:04:00] reprinted, yes. That book was a success in many ways, right? And look at me. One thing that, as the years went by, I didn't like is that I feel that it has a very liberal side, I mean, there's a side where it's too soft, right? I mean, when criticizing the rigid, I feel that it goes too far from flexible, so to speak. So, and that happens a bit like with certain radicalisms in the north, which have to do with the rhetoric of friendship and tenderness as being so focused on care.

And so, I feel that without wanting to, as if to contradict the opposite, like machismo, rigidity, blah, blah, blah, they fall into something a bit... I mean, since that's the book or at least my reading of that book, at this point, I'm being too soft, because I think that the negative part of being a militant and organizing, well, it's important, right?

It's important to talk, isn't it? So, it's true that in the book, it's a good vibe, so to speak . I think that's why it's a success because there's a "pop" side to that book, a soft, sweet side, that's easy to chew. And it's good for activism, but there's a part of me that says, well, we have to talk about resentment, we have to talk about hate.

We need to talk about the importance of breaking up with each other, of fighting each other, without falling into punishment and blame and persecution. But I do think that the book doesn't quite achieve that with breaking up or negativity in general.

We should go elsewhere and I think that for the past year, since the genocide has intensified, it is time to rethink anti-imperialism, to rethink things that cannot be so flexible, right? I mean, they are killing, bombs are falling and it is not a question of whether the 20th will fall on us or not, or when the 20th will fall on us.

Well, there is an empire managing a genocide that has intensified very strongly over the last year. And that means that it is getting tougher, it is getting tougher. In other words, the political landscape has changed. And there are [00:06:00] processes where we can be very flexible and patient, but there are processes where we cannot, where we have to respond because the bomb falls on your head, that is, and that's it.

So I remember a bit like the transition from the 60s to the 70s, or the transition to the 20s, right? I mean, historically this is what has happened. Hippism ends and the guerrillas arrive. Anarchism ends and the communist party begins. I mean, there are moments where history consumes you and becomes a little more, well, I'm not going to be harsh, but yes, even in the north, the anarchists who came from writing that book as very Ticunist are becoming more leftist, more revolutionary, much more Leninist. And I think that has to do with, well, a kind of Leninism, well, modern or cool.

The Zapatista type in the Anglo version, but I think that has to do with the current conditions. I think that before the pandemic, after the pandemic, there are two planets, both because of the recognition of genocide, and because of what was done throughout the decade that for me ends in the pandemic. Well, there was a very cool side, but also a very valid side.

The insurrection is already here. And now we say no, it is not here. We are not stopping the United States, this empire, we are not stopping it. At other times in history, we have been able to put certain limits on imperialism. Not completely, but some battles have been won.

So, well, I think that book was of its time. I mean, 2016 and that anarchism of friendship and of connecting and flowing and all that side that is a bit hippie. I think it is very much of its time, of the last decade, but I think that time is no longer ours, because of the conditions. I mean, because we are reacting and responding and organizing ourselves against other problems.

Chris: Sure, sure. And if you could update it in your own words, what would be the most important issues [00:08:00] to change or replace?

Alf: I mean, look, I'm going to tell you about another book, but it's also from the north.

So, I don't really like giving it to them so much, but a book that, for example, I would respond strongly to would be this one that Traficantes gave me, now that I work with them in Madrid, called Towards a New World Civil War, by Lazzarato, right?

So I say, what happens is that he is a Leninist, right? So, he hits him hard, he hits him hard. I mean, but this has always happened, but there are several groups that are responding, right? I mean, for example, in the case of this book that Lazzarato just mentioned to you.

Well, he says that in the last 50 years, including militancy, which would be at the end of 50 years, politics as such was not discussed? So, if you apply Lazzarato to Militancia Alegre, indeed, it is never talked about that, well, the US government controls the world and is winning. I mean, and there were struggles in the 60s, 70s, which more or less managed to stop [00:09:00] that imperialism, the national liberations, for example.

The struggles began with Vietnam, Mahler and Cuba and ended with others. Were we able to more or less stop that imperialism of that time? But for example, Militancy never once talks about politics in a hard sense, right? That is, anti-Trump, for example, anti-global like global north or north and global. That is, in the sense that they govern the world, right?

And that is not discussed, right? I mean, at no time is it said, well, we, as the North, have a debt with the South, not only economically, but politically, right? I mean, in terms of not allowing the autonomy of the South. And Palestine and Lebanon are the, well, the most extreme case, right? Although here it is the same, right? I mean, the fight, the war against the Zapatistas is the same genocide, with the same bullet.

That is, the same investor, the same profits. It is the same genocide. So, but not talking about that, not talking about the merely political, [00:10:00] right? I mean, about how Morena works for the American government and kills the Zapatistas and the Central Americans. By not talking about these kinds of things as harshly political.

I mean, how Trump controls the Mexican militia, la la la. Well, it is a hippie book, isn't it? I mean, in the sense that, there the Leninists have a point. In this case, Lazzarato but many other gangs, when answering the anarchist gang. Yeah, the friendship is very cool and the... Let's tune in.

I mean, okay, but you're standing in a world that benefits from destroying this world that you and I are standing in, right? So, in many ways: the real, the symbolic, the economic. Tourism, for me, is just one chapter in that series of death industries. So no, by not talking about it.

I think that it is a book that omits the main place of enunciation, which is the empire, if it speaks of the empire, but I feel that it lacked the political aspect. That is, how the North dominates and controls [00:11:00] the South, the government of the North in particular.

By not speaking about that, he did give me a book that I don't know how it will age. I mean, I say, well, let's see how it goes, because it does serve the purpose that Tiqqun and those things served at the time, which was to respond to the vertical left, so to speak. But that moment, at least in the north, has already passed, right? And they themselves have already returned to verticality.

I mean, those who attacked Leninism, we are in this other one. So it's funny because they have their own cycles and we have other cycles of struggle, right? And other genealogies and other rhetorics. I mean, it's very different. There's the translation. That's why that book is so militant because, we had to defend our own context, right?

And to say, well, it's their genealogy, ours has other concepts. I mean, it has won wars and revolutions. There are many triumphs in our history in the south. In fact, in the north there are more defeats and instead, [00:12:00] the national liberations, well, practically all of them triumphed, if you think about it, against imperialism.

Of course it is no longer fashionable to talk about this because colonialism is already somewhere else... it has already gone somewhere else. Right? The majority of anticolonialism no longer comes from its genealogy in the struggles for national liberation or violence?

Violence is out of fashion and this book has something of that in it? How can we not talk about how in Mexico we had to shoot to recover a little of what we have? No! We have to talk about friendship, love, tenderness. That part is what I think no longer speaks much to our time and we'll see what will happen next, we'll see what will happen next.

No, although you are useful, right? I mean, a lot of people who are involved in activism live with a lot of affection from that book and that's fine. I mean, I think it's fine. I think it lacks the political and negative part, but well, we couldn't ask for everything from just one book. No.

That's what the Europeans did to us, bringing the Bible and [00:13:00] killing us under the pretext of a single book. So I think we shouldn't fall for it. That's right, it's colonial to want to ask everything from a single book. If that book gave what it had to give in its context and that context, for me, this is over. In other words, it was a useful tool that responded and now here's what follows.

Chris: Well yes, I remember that there was a footnote in the book by Silvia Federici and I have it.

The quote here said that

"What matters most is to discover and recreate the collective memory of past struggles. In the United States, there is a systematic attempt to destroy this memory. And now this is spreading throughout the world. Reviving the memory of past struggles makes us feel part of something bigger than our individual lives and in this way gives a new meaning to what we are doing and gives us courage, because it makes us less afraid of what [00:14:00] can happen to us individually."

And I feel like there is something there as well, I don't know if it's driven from above or if it's just a lack of memory, but yes, I feel that it is, it's very strong that there is a lack of lineage, in politics today, in contemporary social moments. But well, I wanted to ask you a little bit about your experiences with tourism as well. I would like to ask you about what kind of reactions you received, received as a result of the podcast and if those conversations changed your ideas about the topics discussed.

Alf: I had to ask Pame directly because I think she experienced it in her own way too. But well, it was really cool. First of all, the beauty of that program. There were several things. First, that program was supported by the American Institute of Anarchist Studies, and that [00:15:00] was nice, to have the support. I mean, not making ourselves so precarious. And also not having to ask shitty people for money to do cool stuff, no, that always feels good. Like not betraying the content, meaning that the form goes hand in hand with the substance, no. So, to start with, that was very joyful. Secondly, great joy, I always work behind closed doors.

I'm a little jealous of my work. So, I opened the door and worked with not only two people, they saw a podcast that there were four of us, five of us. That's very strange. I'd never done that. I don't usually do that. Yes, I work with people, but not with the microphone, not normally, eh?

I always work with groups and movements and things, but let's say behind closed doors, so to speak, or in specific circumstances. So, first of all, the consistency that I feel that this program had, how to align ourselves with an internationalist anarchism, which I think we need to recover.

Internationalism in general, eh? And I think that [00:16:00] Sometimes the fight against tourism unintentionally becomes very nationalistic and does not distinguish between migrant and tourist, these things, like in Mexico, are better than everything else. A little strange, but well, before I get lost, I think there was a nice internationalist gesture there.

I mean, between anarchists from the north and those from the south first and second, well, opening the microphone because it's not something I usually do or used to do until this year, so to speak, I mean, I've been doing monologue as a presenter for several years because I do my social part face to face, so to speak. And I could tell you many things.

But I was very excited about the program with Weaving the Revolutionary Organization, eh? I really loved it. I mean, it seems to me that they do important work. And it seems to me that our time is being thought of from the perspective of revolutionaries as well. Not necessarily like the last decade, the insurrectional and anything goes.

This one, I think that [00:17:00] is changing those approaches a bit, and it's precisely those who have been around for more than 20 years and are about 50 people organized from below with a lot of clarity and a lot of strength. Well, we made a very cool bridge, I didn't go into anarchism and other parts of the radical left, which normally we don't shake hands and we don't talk.

I mean, it's not common or easy. And when it happens, it's usually tense. And for me there wasn't any tension, on the contrary. There was a very cool complement to the outline. It's the last chapter of Emergente. Well, I mean, and I feel that it connects with Militancia Alegre. I mean, calling it militancy and not "joyful activism" was a provocation by the authors.

And I think that movement is like?, among many others that are mentioned, they are just militants, not activists, right? In other words, the activist has a very northern genealogy and very much from the nineties onwards. And I think that they, like the "cool ones" read that Militancia Alegre is still the coolest book, they don't usually look at it, the cool people, they don't usually look at that type of militancy like Thor. [00:18:00] They were all very cool, but I have a special affection for that last one, because yes, I think that we have to think of unusual alliances, like all radical leftists, try to articulate.

And for me, that was the closest thing. And I keep listening to it. And there are things that make me think, for example, what they say about the working class sectors, that there is an indigenous sector, so they fight among themselves and how they are sectorized, well, for me, there are several things that they make me think. They make me think a lot. And their work is very cool. It's just that, since it's not the coolest and nicest. It doesn't have this super design or anything. Well, a lot of people don't pay attention to them. So for me, it was important to give them the microphone and I really missed programs with them, to be honest.

So, for me, that was very nice, with the excuse of the book, because the truth is, we hardly spoke or very little. I would have been able to interview, for example, Raquel Gutiérrez. If I could, I would have [00:19:00] interviewed John Holloway. I mean, I would have continued. The thing is that the job of an interviewer is very different from what I do as a presenter, I mean, it's another path. And well, the resource. Well, there isn't one. Of course. Of course. Because we were able to even pay a little bit of money to the people we interviewed. We were able to charge ourselves a little bit. Pay the designer. It was very different from everything I do. This is not that program.

I insist on the internationalist support, whether small or large, well it was very nice to have, because normally you can't pay for interviews and things, which is funny with so much class struggle, with comrades who obviously have a hard time coming here.

Chris: Not anymore, it's very difficult, but yes, it was a very nice episode. And I'm going to put it on the El Fin de Turismo website when we launched this podcast and also for those who want to know, it's the last episode of Alegría Emergente. Well, speaking of your works Alf [00:20:00] in Pepitas de Calabaza, you explore some peripheral themes of tourism, from the Merida where you grew up, the chiqui loteros or those who divide large lots into small lots to sell them at a usually higher price, sometimes to foreigners. It's one of those themes.

How did your time in Merida influence your understanding of tourism?

Alf: First, I would like to extend the invitation to read my work. This theme of property and tourism and colonialism basically runs through all of my work, but the specific extent to which you are interested in Pepitas is also something I mention in the new book.

There is no Dam Capable of Counting and I speak specifically about how tourism, the tourism industry has been stealing from those of us who come from the working classes. We grew up at the bottom and so on, especially pleasure, leisure. Forget about the [00:21:00] land. If access to water, a series of things, no.

So, there is a bit more elaborate work done there, but effectively, from Pepitas. Well, for me, it is a topic that is central to my work. The topic of colonialism, because for me, talking about tourism is talking about current colonialism, internal and external colonialism, but it is the current colorism. In other words, it is a displacement, part of a process of displacement .

So, in Pepitas, well, that is indeed a protagonist, who, let's say, is the national bourgeois, to put it very theoretically, the small-timer, we call him regionally, who is the landowner. It is not Carlos Slim. In other words, he is not the richest, the richest, but he is, let's say, the medium-range landowner who can buy land and divide it up and sell it, speculate with the land, in the end. But in the south, he resists, last year, to raise the tone to the political again... Last year in the south [00:22:00] he resists, the National Indigenous Congress told us, that half of the land in Mexico is social property, right? And I talked about this when presenting No Existe Dique with Yasnaya Aguilar because Oaxaca is a different case and it causes a lot of envy.

There is a third form of land, which is communal land, but we are not going to get into the legalities. The southeast of Mexico, as Paco represents and I talk about in my second book, tourism has come in because legally, since 1992 the constitution was changed and the communal property has been broken and private property has come in, right?

So, to take it to a purely political level, fighting against tourism in Mexico today would be to demand that it cannot be sold, as in Oaxaca there is communal property, not in any other part of the country as far as I know, that land cannot be legally sold. So, not to abstract, or rather to be specific, tourism is advancing, by the first world, in collusion with [00:23:00] with the upper class third worlder, in this case, Paco, to break up social property and introduce individual or private property, right? If there were a mechanism that the Mexican revolution left us, that legal mechanism could not allow tourism to exist in Mexico , at least not legally .

So, since 1992, what was left of the Mexican revolution fell apart and was fought with bullets. We have to recover that negative. In 1992, things changed, we lost what we had won in the revolution. And then tourism exploded. And that is very noticeable for people from the south.

I mean, if I tell you how I went to Tulum for the first time, and when I returned to Tulum 10 or 20 years later, or how I went to Zipolite for the first time. And that's the result. I mean, I can write you 30 books, but all of that is the result of a specific little part of the constitution that I mention in my second legal book, which allowed us to destroy what we won in the Mexican revolution, [00:24:00] which is collective property, in some cases indigenous property, in other cases, simply social property of the working classes.

And I have brought this up with many people and I learned about it by being with the people in the territory, for example, with the assembly of Maya Muuch Xiinbal territorial defenders. They taught me in practice this whole series of mechanisms and defenses by walking with the people, being there. I mean, because sometimes you have to be there to understand the magnitude.

I mean, if you think about it, the many indigenous peoples and popular classes own hectares, 40% of the country, it is in their hands at the level of legal property, but private property is gaining, no, no. And for me, tourism is just a small piece of this current colonizing project, which is taking away from us the little that we gained in the Mexican revolution. Well, we gained several things: public education, public health, all of that is being privatized. But it is very crazy land and territory, because it is very specific. I mean 40 percent versus [00:25:00] 60 percent, an article of the constitution, we must not lose sight of it, I mean. There it is. But look at the belly button of the fart. Aha.

Chris: Mm, thank you. I would like to propose some questions, some provocations. Perhaps in regard to how tourism and rather, more recently, the so-called invasions of tourists, digital nomads to Mexico since the pandemic and other places as well. I mean, it's not just Mexico, but obviously there are other places.

And well, there are certain things that have come up in other podcast episodes, regarding rigid radicalism, and how I see it sometimes as cultures of disposability, which I feel is something fundamental and also unknown in how it works, well, modernity, the colony, that whole trajectory [00:26:00] of shit.

But we see it a lot. I feel it, I feel it on social media. So, I would like to ask you, what do you think about the effects of social media in the contexts of contemporary struggles, but also in this context of tourism, of the invasions in Mexico. So my question is, how do you think social media contributes to rigid radicalism?

Alf: Eh? Well, look, I think that they don't only contribute rigid radicalism, that is, responding very quickly. I think that the algorithm is designed and that is known by the majority, I hope, I suppose this to generate these echo-chambers that they call it. So, I think that the minimum, that is, the most x is that it generates rigid radicalism. I think that in reality the [00:27:00] The far right is winning in the world through social media. And I'm not the one saying this. This has been proven. I mean, Milei , Trump and all the fascism in power, which unfortunately exists, I estimate half the planet, Bukele, etc., Bolsonaro, have a lot to do with what Chumel Torres would be here, with what Eduardo Verastegui would be here. It has everything to do with it, right?

And I think that critical thinking, whatever we want to call this other anti-fascist side, we have not taken that seriously enough as an enemy, right? Because returning to negativity, resentment , well, that is a new enemy. For me, we must destroy it.

I made room, that is, as I have to do. So, I also talked about this with Benja, Yasnaya's partner, the day of my presentation at Volcana. I mean, what happens is that a lot of leftists, a lot of critical thinking and everything, don't want to do pop. So the right is doing [00:28:00] pop and that's why Trump won, and that's why Milei is in power, because they make a kind of pop social networks.

They are not afraid to reduce thought, to provoke. They are not afraid because they have the power, obviously, they control the world. Specifically, Trump, right? So, we, from fear and from a strange classicism, a strange machismo, as if we say that "pop" is bad because it reduces.

Being an influencer is bad because it makes the abstract. It reduces it. It simplifies it. And that is a problem. It is a big problem that for me has to do with the problem of schooling. But to answer you, and I think that social networks support current fascism, more than anything else, I think more than anything else. And that is why we are governed by celebrities and we are in a new phase of politics as a spectacle. And we were not there, we return to militancy as a book that no longer responds to this era, I do not feel that Obama was that.

I don't [00:29:00] feel that PRIism and PANism were like that. We are in another moment, then, as always the left or whatever you want to call it, the thought, the general antifascism, which I don't care about the concepts, as always we are slow, slow to react. Why? Well, because it scares us.

Social media, I think they are bombarding us emotionally with genocide. I think that the way they are handling the image of genocide is destroying the mental health, finishing off, if not, it would have already destroyed the mental health of a good part of those of us who are against Trump and Milei , to say the love that I hope we are more than half of the Earth again, this is what I like to believe.

So, I think we are slow because they want us to be, because they have ruined our mental health. And that makes us slow to respond with the same strength as them, that is, we lack influencers who are a little rougher, to say it as it is, that is, a little more as strong and provocative as them.

I [00:30:00] feel that the influencers on this side do an important job, but very softly. I mean, it's very low-key. Very well behaved. When you listen to Bukele, you listen to Milei or Trump speak and they are the provocateurs, really. This one, they are not afraid to say stupid things. And the left, yes. Yes, they are afraid to screw up.

When they don't realize that what they are doing is provoking in order to move, right? I mean, people know it's an exaggeration. Milei, Bukele and Trump's voters know that they say a lot, that he's a drunk, that he's saying stupid things, but they go and vote.

Chris: Sure.

Alf: The left is failing to raise the tone.

On the contrary. I mean, the more it goes down in the background and the more little Palestinian flags, the more well-behaved we are. And then, ah, "well, let's talk about Palestinian culture, which is very important. It's very beautiful. But I bet that there would be influencers saying let's throw bombs at them and let's kill them, it would be stronger, right? I mean, it would scare them, as it would happen, if history happened in the 70s. This did happen. If we scared them, we don't scare them anymore. And I think that has everything to do with how imperialism today is an algorithm. Before it was something else, and it is an imperialism of the mind and of emotions.

And it's just how they handle the image. I mean, it doesn't matter what they show us, but the way in which Trump's speech is used and the way in which the image of genocide is used, not the genocide. That doesn't matter to them, but the use , they blast us , they blast us all the time.

So we can't articulate. We can't recognize each other. We start competing, we fight, and it's because they're winning. There have been other moments in history where this side really scared me without idealizing it because it can also be very sexist. This one scared Trump and the Trumps. I mean, they [00:32:00] shit themselves and said no, no.

So, well, they are going to kill, right? And so, there was something positive there. There was something positive there and that was lost, our own ability to be scary and to defend ourselves. It has been lost. I mean, and it is very material, because they kill defenders of the territory every week, as well as Palestinians and Lebanese with the same gun, the same weapon. Every week they kill them.

So, of course it is scary to raise the tone. Not because I feel like they are going to kill you. There is a ghost. So, I think that social networks are entirely to blame and that they are managed wonderfully, perfectly, social networks and the Internet because it allowed imperialism to become...

So you carry it everywhere, you want fascism. And that's on the little screens and on the cell phone. They handled it very well. The one who explains it most well is Adam Curtis, in Can't Get You Outta My Head. And I think that we have to take that [00:33:00] even more seriously, because people just say "ah, damn Chumel Torres." No, dude. I mean, he's the cancer of this society. I mean, I can't explain it. He's a real enemy and "ah, he's just some weird PAN member over there." What I mean is that we don't take it seriously, it's like we're not reading the empire in its new phase and how it's run.

Chris: But then, do you think that the ways we can undermine the algorithm is by, getting off the screen? I mean, how is the algorithm also becoming not only internalized in the movements, according to me, but in the mindsets of people and within the movements?

Alf: Of course I don't have an answer, but it occurs to me that this has already been tried many times, such as creating our own technologies. What happens is that they will never be as attractive and powerful, as a class of those who control the earth, because for some reason [00:34:00] they control it and they are winning, right? Because they have all the resources and all the intelligence placed there.

So, if the movements can already have social media, but their posts have no reach and that is managed from above. So this is a deeper problem that has to do with the problem of the image and its management. That is, by controlling the algorithm, the empire, what it is controlling are the images and the narratives. They manage them, that is what I mean by imperialism. That is, we see what the empire wants us to see and that is the end of it. That is, it is a new phase because you do not necessarily have the gringo governing your country as it was before the national revolutions, for example, but you have the cell phone that will only show you what is convenient for the gringo government or the majority.

So breaking the algorithm is breaking the empire, that is, the truth, that is, it is nothing else. And that makes it [00:35:00] cool is cool and uncool, which is usually more important, is not seen and does not have access to resources and does not generate cool images. And if you manage to get an image, it has no reach. In other words, it is very noticeable for my work.

I mean, if I upload my kitty 500 views, if I upload the type of things we are talking about 5. Yes, of course. It is super obvious, not the handling of the image and management. So, well, we have to go back. We have to go back to self-publishing. We have to go back to free media as they have been doing for several decades. I mean, and redo it, recover it, rethink it.

People who are going to Mastodon on social media. People who are getting out of the algorithms, the ugliest ones. I mean, I don't know how much we're going to achieve. I mean, that's why I, my political side, I live it more in person. I mean, I go. I try to go now that Lucio's 50th anniversary is celebrated every year, to make people, to be with the people, to be people. I mean, because [00:36:00] of course if I don't go, I'll never find out.

And if I don't walk with, as I told you, the Mayan assembly, even for five minutes, I won't understand that the main problem of all this is simply an article of the constitution, right? So, I mean, let's say that they post it on the Internet. Who listens to it? Nobody, very few people, but that's because of who controls it.

That the information doesn't arrive, no. So, of course. So that's what I'm getting at, that is, there is a problem with the image. I mean, there is a big problem with the image because of what the extreme right and fascism have achieved perfectly well in our time. It's that people prefer recognition and likes, not the prize, rather than real reparation.

And so social media is based on a new model of counterinsurgency and political pacification and neutralization, which is, I'll go, I'll give you a prize, I'll go and show you, I'll give you a like, but so you'll shut up, no. And so you don't say things, [00:37:00] we are saying, it is a single article.

If we go back to the article, we will stop a good part of the colonialist and tourist capitals today, etc. In other words, what I mean is that they go and reward you, they go and like you so that you become more peaceful. And there was a strategic change that we are also very slow in itself, because in the seventies they killed you, the politically organized middle classes. Not today. Today it is not like that.

Today they kill the people from below, the defenders who live and inhabit the popular classes, the territory and the middle class are rewarded so that you keep quiet. So, how do they reward you by making the algorithm see you a lot and you talk a lot and produce a lot of content, but it is content. I repeat, very well behaved.

It's a soft content, which omits the political parts, which omits topics of imperialism versus insurgency, blah, blah, I mean. It talks about everything else, ways of life, radical tenderness, [00:38:00] alternative consumption, solidarity sisterhood, everything you want, except if we don't cut off Trump's head, that condition doesn't stop. I mean, I don't know if I explain myself.

Except for the most important thing, I mean, I'm caricaturing it. By cutting off Trump's head we're not going to stop journalism, but you get my drift. They're handling censorship and we're already talking about techno-techno-feudalism. We're giving away content that supports imperialism and we don't realize... we're so alienated right now with the algorithm that we work for it for free.

No? And it includes me, that is, my PDFs are free. My radio is free. I am a slave to the Internet and that's it, right? And then, to the extent that we don't know it, we feel the negativity of that dispossession and how we all work for the empire. We like it a lot, so we alienate ourselves more, right? I mean, because I don't charge for my radio stations.

I don't charge for the PDF [00:39:00] literally. It dispossesses me and makes me precarious in a harsh, direct sense. The problem is that saying it is strong because people, well, as they listen to your program or mine, and it costs us MXN $5. Well, people buy the friend and say, great, they see me on the internet. When only people who think like you are seeing you.

And no one else. I mean, not a single follower anymore. People who already thought like you, before coming across your content. So, in reality we are not achieving propaganda, right? And I think it is super important, because to the extent that we always work with those who think like us, we are not pushing the fascist 50 percent, on the contrary, we respect it and we say, well, I work with the 50%. I stay with the 40% of social property and I never push private property or the fascist 50%.

And there you are, it's very comfortable to talk to each other. Well, don't let anyone bother you, don't let anyone send you [00:40:00] bots. Because what they do to me is they attack me on the Internet, right? So, every time I say what needs to be said, they send me bots and they scare me, like many people, no, they threaten you.

And all of this is perfectly managed, in Mexico since Peña Nieto, by Peña bots. These technologies are felt very clearly. Many times they are Israeli. It is felt very clearly, right? And they work perfectly well, because they pacify and neutralize wonderfully. People are already stopping what they have to say because you feel that... I mean, because you feel the opposite effect, censorship is felt as a reward.

Chris: Totally. Thank you very much. Alf. I would like to provoke a little bit this idea that the algorithm is only softening us. In softening, you said? In softening. Yeah. Yeah, because well, [00:41:00] it also seems to me that the algorithm is asking for, putting in, reinforcing the anger.

And I recently discovered, I discovered a book called Discard Studies, which attempts to formulate hypotheses not only around the social histories of waste and pollution, but also of exile and displacement. And the idea in discard studies is that all of these things are very closely related to each other.

Social media also creates a platform for social expulsions in the form of cancellations or escrachees, for example.

Alf: Mm-hmm.

Chris: So, also if the rhythm is imposing, inviting us to be more peaceful, I feel that there is a way that is imposing, pushing, inviting us to discard, throw away, the [00:42:00] people among social movements, that is, among social movements, also in the interpersonal way.

And I wanted to ask you about that and the consequences for long-term struggles.

Alf: Mm-hmm. Look, I feel that it was discussed in particular in the second episode of Alegria Emergente with a guest named Tomás Calles. We talked about that with him. Look, I feel that this topic is very complicated, because for me, the escrache , well, what I know most today is the escrache that comes with gender, with sexual abuse. And at the same time, I think that we have to do a complete genealogy of the escrache because the escrache , every time... I mean, if we take it out of gender and put it in politics, class, race, and everything else, this one, if you notice, all the time, going back to the 50% fascist and the non-fascist, the 50 % fascist has narrowed to the 50% non-fascist.

This is all about the control of narratives and images. I mean, [00:43:00] If you see the image, for example, and for me, it is a form of escrache , and for our time. If you see how the United States created the image of Cuba, it is a form of escrache , right? I mean, like, I'm going to speak really badly of those guys. I'm going to say, I'm going to publish all the books and all the content that speaks badly of Cuba, right?

And for me, there is a kind of escrache there, a pre-escrache, so to speak. So, in political terms, I tell you again that I feel that the leaders are missing in this whole discussion. There have always been and will always be ways to manipulate and destroy when people are doing more or less cool things, well, they will look for you where and there they will screw you, right?

And the government also participates in this with its bots, right? And its handling of information, the distribution of information in particular. So, I feel that escrache must be seen as part of the counterinsurgency, not all escrache is , because there are escraches that, for example, do not become public and become processes, for example, [00:44:00] of... that is, public denunciation is not punitivism as an exercise in public exemplary punishment, there are escraches or specific denunciations, which rather become exercises in restorative justice, behind closed doors, which have been effective.

And I have learned about several and I have been invited to several processes. This one and with several movements. I have realized that justice was exercised by ourselves . Yes, carried out to repair specific things with specific solutions without making an image, without giving the algorithm what takes away all our time - time, energy, without giving it the photo where it says "to make your cool escrache speak..."

I mean, just solve it , that's what a lot of things on the Internet don't do. They talk but don't act, and you can talk whatever you want as long as you don't act. That's the great trick of the social network. Let's not talk about everything, as long as we don't change anything.

This then nothing. I feel that the escrache , well, has to be seen as such, it has a part [00:45:00] It's cool for me, especially behind closed doors, like processes that I would call restorative justice , that is, that don't tend towards image, they can create an image, but that is not their final objective, but rather to repair specific damages with specific solutions, not case by case, without abstracting this , this versus a type of liberal escrache , whitewashed, spectacular, cheap, that the only thing it has done is counterinsurgency. Every time there are leaders. "Oh, he's a macho," right? Every time there is a social movement, "ah, they work for the Russians, they work for the Chinese, this , they receive money, they receive money from this , this." And the escrache , yes, it is one of the best tools, because it generates narratives and images, not that they contrast what has been won.

I mean, I'm going to give you a fund as an activist so you can talk about tourism, whatever you want, as long as you don't talk about this and that, okay, [00:46:00] then you send to collect and it will be great for you. And I'll make you super famous and that's cool.

Well, that is the fight, so that we all do well materially. But they censored you. They told you that you only talk about, so, look, we returned to the subject of escrache. I mean, a lot of those people who were escrache. I'm going to put one. Miguel Peralta. The case of Miguel Peralta, for me it would be a case of escrache, not this Miguel Peralta today is persecuted by the Mexican state and many people are going to tell you that he is a sexist. They are going to tell you many things, but they are not going to tell you the other part, right? The political part of his fight, against a government that governs, not to say Samir Flores as a escrache, not to say Hortensia Telesforo with a type of escrache.

I mean, are you catching on? I mean, what happens then is that from above, they control the narrative and control the image and the distribution of information. They tell you, look, I'm going to pay you for one thing, but keep quiet about the other.

Then put up the colorful flag. And CDMX is already gay and trans, [00:47:00] but you never talk about social class again.

Please let the poor remain poor. She only talks about trans, right? If you notice, it's like the escrache. I mean, the escrache says we're going to destroy Miguel Peralta's political leadership by putting ultra emphasis on his sexist side, which I don't doubt he has had like many leaders and like many people, I mean, I'm not saying no, I'm just saying that the way in which these types of accusations are used is to destroy the political side. Many times, not all. Mm, but to give just one example, and today, for today I'm talking to you about a case of current criminalization, like we could talk about Samir Flores or Hortensia Telesforo and the entire counterinsurgency. The counterinsurgency is a type of escrache. That's already changed.

I repeat, the most visible people are given awards and attention. The less visible people are killed or criminalized like Miguel. They are about to put him in jail for 50 years if we don't pay attention [00:48:00] to that case, right? That's what they want, that we don't pay attention. So that's what I'm getting at, I mean, the crime almost doesn't matter, the lack of damage almost doesn't matter, but the handling of it.

There is a kind of economy, I would even say, an economy of complaints and an economy of image that we are not aware of. We are so far removed that we go, based on the first thing that comes to mind: "Oh, that guy was a macho." That's it. Everything is left, either that guy worked for China and even all the work he has done, how he works for China, or how they talk about, for example, the narratives about Venezuela and Nicaragua and Cuba.

I mean, it's impressive. It's a public escrache, I mean. Who's going to speak well of that kind of country? It's very difficult.

Chris: Oh, at least say like, "I don't know, I don't know"...

Alf: Or at least say, "I don't know," but what I mean is that regardless of what Venezuela and the left-wing machismo have done, [00:49:00] the handling of that error.

I mean, I guess, yes, I think he makes mistakes like everyone else. The handling is the part that worries me the most, like social media, the distribution of that information. I mean, like, we're only going to talk about shit , let 's be clear, because it suits the United States , that Miguel Peralta is in jail, that Venezuela only knows shit, that China only knows... I don't doubt that there is a shitty side, but the limits of the discourse are interesting.

You can't talk about what's already been done . The moment he says it's something good. Cancelled. To jail. That's it. So that draws my attention, because people think it's a moment of discursive freedom. Fascism is winning, right? I mean, that's Trump, but that's the Palestinian and Lebanese genocide.

But but but there is a symptom of that in that we cannot, we cannot speak.

I feel that the [00:50:00] The Internet is much more fascist than before. I mean, I feel much more censored than what I see happening in the 20th century. Do you understand? The truth. I mean, I see Che Guevara's speeches and I say no, because at that time you could talk.

He speaks like that today, a bullet in the forehead. That's easy. You didn't wake up. You would disappear. So I say, did we win or lose in terms of discourse? No, I think we lost because you watch TV in the 20th century and he spoke without being shot. Today, not today anymore. Samir spoke, Morena killed him. That's it. That's it. In other words, today the Palestinians spoke, all dead.

I mean, then I think we lost with the Internet. We didn't win, but I think that tourism, I repeat, and colonialism, then it's just like a little part. Honestly, I think it's like a little piece of everything that's a bigger thing. Of course it's an industry that has [00:51:00] been gaining a lot of strength, but for me there would be counter-tourism and a pilgrimage.

I feel like I'm on a pilgrimage. Look, what tourism destroyed is being rebuilt when I try to approach social movements, from my class, that is, from my skin color and all my contradictions. Well, sometimes I keep walking, with people who have taught me things that will never appear on my cell phone.

We deliberately don't know the truth. Even if they post them, they won't reach me. And so I think that if there is a counter-tourism and I think that we should go looking for it in the subject of pilgrimage or radical hospitality. Why? Because there was a sacred subject, right? I mean, there was something sacred in the pilgrim. It wasn't just pleasure tourism, although it had sharing and idleness at its side, but for me we would recover the ability to defend ourselves, various things that have been taken from us, the ability to speak that I think they took from us based on awards and views, not based on punishments, because there would be a [00:52:00] pilgrimage , from a political perspective, right ?

For example, I'm told that next year there will be a pilgrimage in Brazil. No, many people are going to go to Brazil from different latitudes. And for me, that is counter-tourism and sacred political pilgrimage. No. So people go to Anticop, you go, I mean, going is super important because you clean up the ground with garbage and you are face to face with a reality that the imperialist algorithm wants us to not get, you go out. Of course. The problem is that it insists on you. It's so fashionable, "death to tourism," that it's not easy to talk about there being very important counter-tourism. There have always been, right? I mean, when the Zapatistas say come, things happen that don't happen.

So you have to go, no. You have to go, of course. So, and that is counter-tourism. And the Zapatistas are super aware. Not only gringos come here, only güeritos. What's the problem with this way they become politicized? Yes, I think it is more middle class not to try to [00:53:00] find the cause and turn the industry around. Mmm. And simply say death to all tourism. Well, yes, in theory it sounds very good, but in practice it is gaining ground.

Chris: Mmm, sure, and so I'd like to ask you about radical hospitality as well, but I feel like a lot of people fall into trying to define what it is.

But then I would just like to ask you, just like on a pilgrimage, if you like, if you have found what you would call your radical hospitality on your travels or at home, that is, in your neighborhood.

Alf: Look, this is something I learned. I mean, what is called radical hospitality is something I have practiced all my life and only later did I start to develop it. Well, I have been active all my life and I still am active mainly in the underground.

It's counterculture. But for example, I've been in punk, in [00:54:00] skateboarding, as in the radical left in general, with all its branches, all my life, I've come and gone.

And my house has always been the home of many people and it's a practice that I hadn't thought about, right? That of not staying in the hotel, that of taking people for a walk and showing them the hidden places in the city, not the places that are clean and in English. I mean, it's something that is very much in the punk and anarchism of those things, right?

And I have a house in many places around the world because I have also given a home to many people from many places around the world, from a very young age, from skate tours when I was 14 years old, people came from everywhere and stayed at my house and I didn't realize that it is something, that if you go on a pilgrimage, radical hospitality or whatever we want to call it, before the real estate boom, tourism. Well, it always existed, right? I have always existed, right? So nothing. For me it is strange to talk about it because for me, it is not questioned, right? I mean, I receive people all the time and I receive people all the time from a lot of people. Lately it has become more international. But before it was more between , well, small societies, whatever.

So I could tell you my whole story, based on that axis, if you want. But my point is that it is a practice that I have integrated. I mean, no, I never questioned it. I mean, and I eat a lot of what remains in the counterculture, what remains underground, I mean, a lot of people live it like this. And every time someone invites me, for example, the last time they invited me to a town, it was Yasnaya, which we had already agreed to go to.

Because the Mixes listen to the program and everything. And I said, "Of course." So, for me, the moment you tell me when I'm going, I'm going. And for me there is something, I mean, it has to come from a town like the Mixe, the invitation so that it's not tourism. For me, there has to be an explicit recipient and an invitation . I mean, it's part of the gift economy and those things that we have always done in the south and in the south we have always done consciously or unconsciously.

I think now we have to start [00:56:00] to elaborate it as well. Now we have to start theorizing and thinking about it because as it progresses, the private property of colonization, Well, these communalisms are being lost, because they are practices that the people have , that the popular classes have, that the undergrounds have. People move all the time, all the time.

It doesn't move in fancy and cool ways. I mean, the photo isn't the pretty one on Instagram. So, therefore, the practice that interests me is the practice, not so much the conceptualization or the image. Well, we can't reproduce it and commercial tourism is winning. To give you another example, several towns in the southeast also spoke to me about alternative tourism.

And, for example, they set up various things with the surrounding towns asking for permission, returning to 40% of the social property and that part of the constitution that we would have to ask for back to us, they asked permission from all the ejidos. So you went by bike or birdwatching [00:57:00] the things that normal tourism does, but they spoke with the owners of the ejidos with the one from the social property that I and the Zapatistas and many people defend and they told them well, "I'm going to bring gringos who want us to do it. Well, give us your beer" or "how much are you going to charge them?" And for me it's counter-tourism, you see, and walking with them in those territories.

You learn it. I mean, listening to radio programs and reading books is going to be awesome. I mean, you have to go, not this one and look how interesting, because that 40% of that social property, well, who could get the money, who gets the hotel? No? Because many of these people are very precarious, so we don't just say "ah, fuck the money in tourism," but to whom do we give it and why.

When you look at it, I see in the villages very cool initiatives of redistribution in this direction. There are a lot of very cool cooperatives that redistribute the opposite of what a hotel does. But we return to the subject, because "they are not [00:58:00] cool" and they do not have the coolest design and they are not influencers."

Well, nobody knows that there are communal practices that include mobility between towns and between very cool people. I mean, the truth is. I have seen many incredible counter-tourist cooperative projects.

So, well, that's it. People who do informative walks, like pedagogies for walkers, like counter-tourism. There are a lot of people and a lot of things, radical historians, there who make their counter-discourses and take people. I mean, I think there are a lot of them, for me, there is a lot of hope there.

What happens is that we don't connect to it. In other words, the algorithm makes it so that you don't see it and you stay, I mean, that information, you say that they post it, it's not going to reach you, right? I mean, it's designed so that it doesn't reach you. So, but there are a lot of really cool things. I don't live in that [00:59:00] sad dystopia, that a lot of people live in, like "I'm worthless."

"We have to stop moving." I don't live it. We don't have to move too much either. I think that nomadism in the middle class is already a form of dispossession as well. There is, as it were, forced dispossession in the middle classes. Not below. But well, I don't live it with this doom whatever. Condemnation. I mean, like, ah, all movement is fucked up, there are very essentialist people who say, "All tourism is shit."

And I would say, well, you live with a lot of guilt. Dude, that's great. It's called Catholicism. And I know it very well. There are other ways. I mean, without so much guilt, you can give your money to cool people and it's not going to solve the problem, but it's cooler than giving it to the hotel and the colonialist and the one who broke social property.

I mean, if you do something, it's not minimal, but you do something. Well, I've seen things where I say, well, there's something here, no, [01:00:00] there's something here. It also happens that many times initiatives that reject "what's cool" don't want to be very visible and don't want to be very famous, so that's the problem with fair trade and alternative trade, which seeks to make people a little bit invisible sometimes.

That's problematic, isn't it? Because then, how do we send the gang with the cool gang, if the cool gang doesn't want to be sent gang all the time. I mean, they don't want to do business, they don't want to do business because they become capitalists. Anyway. But that, that's another problem, not the problem of cooperativism.

Chris: Sure. So, overflowing with topics and beautiful conversation, Alf, but if I can before we wrap up, I'd like to ask you about your new book. No Dam Can Hold Back the Raging Ocean. Can you tell us a little bit about what it's about and how your previous work has influenced [01:01:00] that new one?

Alf: Yes,

Chris: You've touched on it a little bit, but

Alf: Yeah. This is a book that you can buy in several bookstores, Volcana, Polilla and there where you are with Don Gregorio. We soon want to have it in Jícara, in Utópicas, at Casa Tomada and with me on the Internet, and you can download it in PDF.

I send them to everyone. But, well, it's a book that basically, to put it in a sentence, is my experience and my elaboration on anarchism or the radical left in general. Basically. That is, it tells you a bit about my life story and how I lived it, how I received it. And what have I researched and thought about a practice?

At this moment, history might call it anarchism, but at another time it is called other forms, but yes, like anti-authoritarianism, etc. So, the book is that. I mean, it is a personal essay, but it is also a [01:02:00] political philosophical essay, right? So it's both. I'm telling you about my life, but I'm also telling you about the history of these ideas and how I have seen them, in practice and practiced them as far as I could.

Hmm.

Chris: Well, I'm going to make sure that those places, at least in Oaxaca and also online, are going to be listed on the tourism website when I launch the episode. And on behalf of our listeners, Alf, I'd like to express my sincere gratitude for your willingness to join us today, to talk about these complex issues and to ensure that this dissidence has a place in the world.

Thank you very much. And how could we find your work online? Through social networks or

Alf: Yes? Unfortunately, I wish it wasn't going to happen. But no, I [01:03:00] had no other choice. Yes, my main job is that I have two books abroad that can be found in the bookstores I mentioned.

What I do as a broadcaster is free everywhere, it's Un Sueño Largo Ancho y Hondo. It's @1slaaahh on various social networks. And if you put it there on the internet it will be free and as I was saying before, everything goes together. My fiction part and my pedagogical and political part are pretty much united.

It's more or less the same wave, but yes, let's say the most immediate thing is to listen to what I do, I've been doing it for several years, as a broadcaster. So you just click on it and that's it. And I ask them there to give me a like, to give me the reason why, until now, no, there's no one who can, I mean, I don't work for a [01:04:00] radio station that takes care of my networks and I just record and I would be fine, but no, well, I manage it myself.

So for now, if necessary, the like and the share.

Chris: Sure. Well, those are also going to be on the end-of-tourism website when the episode launches. So, thanks a lot, Alf.

Alf: Thanks, Chris.

Leave a comment

Subscribe now

S6 #3 | La Peregrinacion Entre Mundos | Anny Puac & Jairo Lemus

Chris Christou — Tue, 01 Apr 2025 16:10:59 GMT

Mis entrevistados en este episodio son Anny Gabriela Ventura Puac y Jairo Chamalé Lemus.

Anny es ajquij(guía espiritual), politóloga e investigadora, actual curadora en jefe de Espacio/C. Nacida en Chuwila, Chichicastenango, Quiché, Guatemala. Es mujer Maya Kiche con identidad diversa, sanadora y contadora del tiempo. Tiene estudios en Ciencias Políticas y Sociales, Relaciones Internacionales y una especialidad en ODS para Naciones Indígenas. Es confundadora de Espacio C, en dónde se ha desempeñado como gestora cultural desde 2013 y curadora en Jefe desde 2023.

En Guatemala su trabajo está presente en diversos espacios sociales, políticos y culturales, como consultora independiente para organizaciones no gubernamentales, trabajando con niñas, mujeres y adolescentes mayas y no mayas a nivel nacional, en temas concretos como empoderamiento político, salud (diabetes / VIH) y sanación desde la Cosmovisión Maya.

Jairo es persona disidente, del territorio Poqomam de Mixco, viajero e investigador se la religiosidad popular, las expresiones culturales y la espiritualidad de su contexto cercano. Es guía de turismo y estudiante de antropología.

Fajas, colección personal Jairo Chamalé Lemus, enviadas por Abisaí Navarro desde la Ciudad de Oaxaca.

Notas del Episodio

Anny y Jairo y el Cristo Negro

El camino de peregrinacion entre Mixco y Oaxaca

Quirio Catano y las origines del cristo negro

Las diversas formas de sacrificar y bailar

Las colonizaciones de Equipulas

El base de cristo negro en el mundo maya/mexica

El crisis climatico y la falta de ofrendas

Las consecuencias de la perdida de hospitalidad

La memoria vivida del intercambio intercultural antigua

Tarea

Abisaí Navarro

María Jacinta Xón / Proyecto Tux Cocina Gourmet de Origen

Hoja de Pacaya - Instagram

Los Cofrades Chichicastenango - Instagram

espacio/C arte+memoria - Instagram

Faja antigua de mujer poqomam de Mixco, que llegó de Santo Tomás Jalieza en Oaxaca. Colección Museo Ixchel de Traje indígena, Ciudad de Guatemala.

Transcripcion en espanol (English Below)

S6 - Anny Puac & Jairo - Peregrinacion a Esquipulas

Chris: [00:00:00] Bienvenida y bienvenido al podcast El Fin del Turismo Annie y Jairo. Gracias a ambos por acompañarme hoy. Me encantaría que pudieran contarles a nuestros oyentes desde dónde llaman y cómo aparece el mundo ahí para cada uno de ustedes.

Anny: Muchas gracias, Chris y buenos días a quienes nos escuchen o buenas tardes o buenas noches, dependiendo su zona horaria.

Mi nombre es Anny y yo le saludo desde el territorio maya K'iche' de Chuwila, K'iche' Guatemala específicamente.

Jairo: Buenos días a ambos, para mi un gusto estar por acá. Sawe ta inteer winaq (Buenos días a todas y todos) mucho gusto desde el territorio pues Poqomam de Mixco y también desde las cercanías a la ciudad de Guatemala, pues gracias por esta [00:01:00] oportunidad para compartir conocimiento.

Chris: Y gracias a ustedes dos. Yo estoy aquí en Oaxaca y el mundo parece obviamente un poco raro. Bueno, quizás no es obvio, pero parece más raro día por día. Estamos aquí hoy para hablar de Esquipulas en Guatemala. Y Esquipulas es el lugar de varias iglesias que han abergado al cristo negro de la ciudad, que es famosa por sus supuestos milagros durante los últimos cuatro siglos.

De manera similar, la peregrinación al santuario es la más grande de América Central y la segunda más grande de las Américas, con lo que leí, 5 millones de personas que lo visitan cada año. Ahora, para empezar, ¿Estarían dispuestos a explicar que impulsó a cada uno [00:02:00] de sus intereses o relaciones con este lugar y la práctica de la peregrinación?

Anny: Sí, por supuesto Chris. Pues, yo desde como mi relación, digamos personal o individual como familia, yo tengo, digamos, como clara la idea de cuando inician estas peregrinaciones, de pronto, cuando yo ya tenía unos siete u ocho años de edad, así, para decirte que yo tengo claridad, pero cuando yo retrocedo a los archivos de la familia, pues veo que el tema de peregrinar a Esquipulas, pues comienza con mis abuelas.

Jairo: Entonces yo te podría decir que dentro de mi familia, la peregrinación a Esquipulas , así quizá llevará mínimamente unos 80 años presente en la familia, sobre todo del lado de [00:03:00] mi abuela materna. Que ella es de un territorio K'iche' de Quetzaltenango, en donde pues empezaban el viaje, en conjunto, allá fuera un viaje de barrio organizado por el barrio, o era un viaje familiar, entonces se iban uno o dos buses en aquel tiempo cuando no había tanto transporte, verdad? Era un lujo también irse por alguna ruta en donde hubiera paso para bus. Y pues, lo que no se pudiera transitar ya en bus, pues se hacía caminando, se hacían burros, pero, más o menos por ahí viene un poquito la historia de de cómo inician estas rutas de peregrinaje en mi familia, digamos.

Con el caso de nosotros, yo no tengo conciencia de pequeño de haber, pues, llegado a Esquipulas. Bueno, hay un dato bien interesante, cuando yo cumplo 40 días de haber nacido, mi familia decide llevarme a [00:04:00] Esquipulas, eso pues está en el archivo fotográfico de la familia como agradecimiento, porque al final nací con... nací bien.

Jairo: Y entonces la familia decide peregrinar es el dato más cercano que tengo de la personal de las idas a Esquipulas. Claro, esto siempre lo he tenido muy familiarizado dentro de mi contexto cercano, puesto que la gente pues de mi municipio suele ir justo organizada en excursiones de las diferentes organizaciones religiosas que hay en mi municipio.

Estas, pues designan fechas y son buses llenos de aproximadamente 50 personas. Cada bus suelen llegar hasta tres, de acá de Mixco, pues que se van para para Esquipulas. Y ese es algo bien interesante porque es pues, parte de la modernidad, digámoslo ir en bus, pero hay muchas anécdotas de las personas de acá del pueblo que [00:05:00] cuentan cómo, pues iban de una forma más rústica, verdad? Que podía ser, pues en peregrinaje caminando, que no era la única peregrinación, de hecho la del cristo negro de Esquipulas. Hoy puntualmente, vamos a hablar de ella.

Pero pues están también las peregrinaciones Antigua Guatemala que está aquí cerquita, aquí detrás de nosotros hay un cerro que es el cerro Alux. Este cerro se cruzaba, pues caminando, todavía lo hace la gente caminando porque detrás del cerro está, pues la bajada para llegar a la Antigua Guatemala.

Chris: Gracias. Gracias a ustedes. Pues así, por conocer un poco más de sus historias, como de peregrinación, me gustaría saber un poco más si se podrían ofrecer algo de la larga historia de Esquipulas, del cristo negro y pues, ¿Cómo se originó la la peregrinación? ¿De donde viene esa historia?.

Jairo: Bueno, como lo mencioné antes, diciendo algunas [00:06:00] palabras en el idioma poqomam. Es el idioma que se hablaba, pues en nuestro pueblo. Lo voy a decir nuevamente más despacio para, pues, describirles que es lo que dije, técnicamente es:

Sawe’ ta inteer winaq, kiroo wilkee’ chipam ma’ q ’oriik taqee, reh ma’ ojeer winaq reh qatinimiit Mixko’ buenos días a todos. Qué gusto pues poder compartir estas palabras y también un poco de la historia de la gente antigua de nuestro pueblo. Porque pues, la verdad es que el peregrinaje a Esquipulas está muy relacionado e intrínseco con la gente de Mixco y justamente también con el territorio oaxaqueño.

Mi nombre, pues es Jairo, Jairo Andrés Chamale Lemus. Yo pues pertenezco a este territorio, a la gente maya poqomam. De acá es la mitad de mi familia de mis antepasados. Y , pues me dedico al turismo. Yo soy guía [00:07:00] de turistas de hace aproximadamente ocho años ya desde que me gradué muy joven. Y, pues me he dedicado justo a peregrinar para que las personas conozcan también el contexto histórico de Guatemala y de las diferentes expresiones culturales, religiosas y también de resistencia de la gente en el territorio de lo que ahora conocemos como Guatemala.

Pues también, soy estudiante de la carrera de antropología, de la licenciatura específicamente en antropología, y pues me he dedicado también a estudiar el caso del idioma maya poqomam en Mixco, que es una comunidad muy cercana a la ciudad de Guatemala, que hemos tenido pues un impacto, demográfico y social, pues bastante fuerte, pues debido al crecimiento del área metropolitana de la ciudad de Guatemala. Es algo a lo que me he dedicado a estudiar durante los últimos años. Y también, pues, a [00:08:00] documentarlo, porque tenemos muchas prácticas culturales y espirituales en nuestro pueblo, que han ido desapareciendo conforme este avance demográfico de la ciudad, muchísimas gracias. Rontyoox aq’oo ta

Anny: Bueno Chris. En realidad hay un registro, digamos histórico, donde dice que el primer peregrinaje que se inicia a Esquipulas, fue en Marzo 1595, cuando la imagen sale del taller de este señor escultor Quirio Cataño, que sale hacia Esquipulas, hacia Chiquimula. Esto está al oriente de Guatemala. Nosotros lo conocemos como la zona caliente de de Guatemala. Pero es la zona, digamos, como caliente árida. Es un territorio en donde hay comunidad Xinca, Popti', si no estoy mal Chortí también. Y pues, la producción que se [00:09:00] tiene por las tierras de por allá, estamos hablando de frutas de algunas plantas, de algunos tubérculos más o menos, pero más que todos se dedican a la fruta, verdad.

Esta primera peregrinación la documenta y la registra el cronista, que se llama Miguel Álvarez. Y él dice que, cuando cuando salióó del taller y se dirigió hacia Esquipulas la imagen iba haciendo diferentes milagros en todo el recorrido hasta llegar a la basílica. Entonces habían personas que le pedían justamente que, que por favor que la imagen pasara por lo menos una noche dentro de la casa de las personas para, bendecirlo. Y Y más o menos se calcula cada año, digamos en la actualidad, ahora en Guatemala y en alrededor de 300 mil personas de todo el mundo, más que todo entre México, Centroamérica, países del sur, por ejemplo de Perú [00:10:00] de Ecuador de Ecuador, Bolivia, si no estoy mal, es como mucha la cantidad de gente que llega, más o menos entre noviembre, que ahorita es como una fecha de noviembre y diciembre y todo enero, digamos, esas son como los tres meses de muchísima más afluencia de personas que llegan llegan a la basílica, verdad? Entonces se le puede llamar romerías, se le puede llamar una peregrinacion que peregrinación, usualmente, pues ahí si que las personas que visitan puede ser que hagan así como un día de visita nada más o puede ser que pueda prolongarse una visita hasta por 10, 15 días, verdad?

De la ciudad de Guatemala, hasta Esquipulas hay una distancia más o menos como entre unos 220 a 250 kilómetros y se recorre, si vas como en romería, pasando por lugares como muy puntuales de toda la peregrinación, en promedio [00:11:00] cada día tú vas haciendo un tramo de 40 kilómetros, al día, digamos si tu intención es ir en peregrinaje así. Entonces eso es más o menos como más datos históricos y el relato, verdad?

Chris: Y estoy un poco curioso, dentro de las estancias, al llegar a Esquipulas, si yo fuera peregrinando, por ejemplo, ¿ Qué haría? ¿Se van parando para hacer sus rezos? Me gustaría saber por alguien que nunca ha hecho una peregrinación, como aparecía esos días antes de venir.

Anny: Bueno, yo te voy a contar un poquito el relato de de mi familia porque mi abuela materna, ella sí era una señora, pues muy católica, no? Entonces, pues ella, su peregrinaje, digamos para ella, era su sacrificio, verdad? En el año, decir bueno, por agradecimiento [00:12:00] a mi salud, a los milagros que me concedió, porque era como muy devota. Era el hecho de salir en ruta de peregrinaje. ¿Qué implicaba esto? Inclusive, preparar comida para no digamos como perder el tiempo, tú pensando en qué comer durante el camino, porque la idea para ellos y para ellas era, pues, ir en como en recogimiento, en rezo constante, en oración, digamos en petición, ir como parando cada cierto tiempo, verdad? Cada 40 kilómetros, porque que ya dentro de la comunidad, católica-cristiana, hay puntos que están como marcados dentro de la ruta en donde tú puedes ir parando con cada familia, porque puede ser que tengan una réplica de la imagen del cristo negro, porque de hecho, cuando fue la primera peregrinación, puede ser que esta familia haya sido una de las [00:13:00] familias que recibió por primera vez el cristo negro.

Entonces se convierte como en ese punto de de parada, verdad? Entonces, cuando hacen ese punto de parada, pues ya bajan. Bajan a hacer oración, bajan a platicar y a convivir con las personas de pronto, a compartir un alimento. Ya sentir, pues, así que también como su fé, su devoción, pero al mismo tiempo su convivencia, su alegría en este, en este tramo de compartir no?.

Entonces eso digamos, es lo que usualmente, pues se ve. Yo también he visto otras personas que, por ejemplo, ya cuando quedan unos, son los últimos 20 kilómetros de recorrido por ejemplo, descienden de sus vehículos y caminan de rodillas esos 20 kilómetros hasta llegar a la basílica. Entonces, pues, los ves, ya puede ser que sea solo el papá con con el hijo, o el papá y la mamá, o pues la diversidad de personas que puedan llegar, que van y que pues hacen su penitencia, y [00:14:00] entregan digamos, pues su sacrificio de esta forma. Así como hay personas que puede ser que, que durante toda su ruta de peregrinaje, hay un ejemplo de unos, de unas personas cercanas a nosotros que tienen un conjunto de marimba, de música, y pues lo que hacen es que van con un vehículo y van ejecutando música todo el trayecto hasta llegar a Esquipulas, y ya cuando llegan a la basílica, bajan con sus instrumentos y se dedican a cantar ya sea una canción, un tiempo, verdad?

Ahí, entonces, pues yo creo que depende, varía mucho de lo que te puedas tú dedicar o el agradecimiento que tú quieras pues dar, o a lo que, pues, lo que tu corazón salga, no? En mi caso como muy puntual, pues nosotros hacemos el recorrido completo los 220 kilómetros en vehículo hasta llegar a Esquipulas.

Y luego, pues ahí ya, o sea, nos establecemos [00:15:00] y como nuestras dinámicas son un tanto como diferentes porque yo no soy católica. Yo soy de la cosmovisión maya, y pues ahí he crecido buena parte de mi vida. Mi concepción como de ver esta ruta de peregrinaje es diferente, porque si bien es cierto el que el cristo negro, pues es una figura de un cristo crucificado cristiano, Jesús, nosotros aprendimos a ver cómo la historia del pueblo Poptí y Chorti y Chortí, en cuanto a que esta ruta de peregrinaje es bien interesante, porque durante toda tu ruta más, más o menos, me atrevería a decir que tal vez un 70 de la ruta, tú vas encontrando montañas de obsidiana, entonces es una ruta que en sí es una ruta de sanación y para nosotros, digamos dentro de la cosmovisión maya está muy relacionada con el Nahual Tijax, que es la obsidiana y para [00:16:00] quizá buena parte de Oaxaca o de su Istmo o de la cultura Náhuatl, por ejemplo, está relacionado con Tezcatlipoca que era justamente esta veneración de esta mujer que decían que era brillante y color de cobrizo y de nigriso verdad?

Y por tanto, Y pues tú sabes que ambas piedras o estos relatos que nos cuentan, pues es justamente sanación y de ahí que nosotros creemos que por eso el cristo negro es tan milagroso cuando se trata de temas de salud.

Jairo: Desde nuestro lado, por así decirlo, forma parte ya de un peregrinaje que no solamente se hace el 15 de enero. Claro, el 15 de enero es el día establecido para hacer el peregrinaje de cristo negro de Esquipulas. Pero pues, muchos de los grupos que les comentaba que son bastante diversos acá en Mixco, grupos religiosos principalmente católicos, o pues sincretizados de [00:17:00] alguna forma, establecen también estas visitas como parte de su organización dentro del grupo de personas que inciden.

Y entonces si, justamente dentro del bus, también se suele, pues, ir rezando el rosario, que es esta práctica de ir rezando las novenas con un orden establecido con cantos y la gente, pues suele ir desde que salen de ciudad de Guatemala o desde que salen de acá desde Mixco, que hay que cruzar la ciudad y luego la ruta hacia el oriente de Guatemala, la gente va haciendo estas oraciones cada cierto tiempo, pero depende mucho del grupo y de qué tan católico sea de alguna forma, porque hay grupos que solamente lo hacen como una excursión claro. El fin principal es de la visita, pues a la basílica del cristo negro y la veneración de cristo negro como tal.

Y, pues solamente llegan en en el bus hasta la basílica y algo que caracteriza mucho a la cultura de [00:18:00] Mixco, es el, la quema de pólvora. A nosotros nos fascina la pólvora y cuando llegamos a Esquipulas justamente esa es la premisa, no? Llegar a quemar bombas de sonido, de sonido estridente en aviso que la gente de Mixco ya llegó.

Y también fuegos pirotécnicos de colores. Es bien curioso porque depende mucho del grupo y a lo que el grupo, pues aunque sea católico o sincretizado con lo maya, a lo que este grupo religiosamente se dedique, encaminado a eso va la actividad que se va a realizar allá.

Tengo conocimiento de un grupo que, de hecho, ya se documentó a gracias al CECEG, al Centro de Estudios Culturales de la Universidad de San Carlos, de Guatemala, es el grupo El Baile de Moros de los Seis Toritos, que es básicamente un grupo de danza tradicional que nace en la aldea Lo De Bran que está acá en Mixco siempre dentro [00:19:00] del área metropolitana y ellos, pues se dedican a bailar El Torito. El Torito es básicamente la representación de una danza que se hace en alusión a dueños de una finca y el trato hacia los animales. Entonces los animales tienen una especie de de revelación contra este dueño de la finca, una historia bien, sutilmente contada desde lo maya también. Y entonces van a hacer esta representación de la danza a Esquipulas. Esto lo hacen justamente para la fiesta del cristo negro. Bailan todo el día, durante tres días seguidos frente al atrio de la iglesia de Esquipulas, mientras millones de personas visitan la basílica de cristo negro y en ese momento ellos están bailando ahí.

Chris: Qué fascinante. Me encanta ese sentido, esa onda que, que hay tanta diversidad, en la forma, los caminos, las celebraciones que se niegue un poco [00:20:00] ese sentido occidental que es como de siempre asumir o buscar una sola respuesta, una sola historia, una sola manera, de actuar, de entender.

Y así fue sorprendiente para mí por leer, por investigar las historias de Esquipulas y de las peregrinaciones porque encontré muchas historias diversas. Entonces voy a leer un poquito de lo que encontré y me gustaría escuchar de ustedes, si se podrían comentar un poco de si hay sentidos de "eso es como puro chisme o es un rumor" o si hay capas y capas dentro de las historias de Esquipulas y las peregrinaciones.

Entonces, pues la primera va que "en la ciudad sagrada de Copán se celebraban grandes fiestas en honor [00:21:00] a dios maya Ek-Kampulá que significa: 'el que empuja las nubes', pues se le atribuía el poder de alejar las lluvias y permitir los días del sol necesarios para preparar la siembra.

Ek-Kampulá que era de color negro, estaba rodeado con una antorcha en la mano izquierda. Su figura se puede apreciar en las graduadas de uno de los templos de Copán."

Ahora, el segundo.

"Algunos relatos dicen que la figura del cristo negro fue ordenada por los conquistadores españoles en Guatemala en ese momento para facilitar la conversión de los pueblos locales al cristianismo."

Ahora, el próximo.

"Las leyendas piadosas afirman que la imagen se oscureció debido a los misioneros españoles que deseaban convertir a los [00:22:00] nativos que adoraban a la deidad nebulosa pagana Ek-Kampulá en el área que también era representada como una figura oscura."

Entonces, supongo que mi pregunta es como, ¿Cuántas de estas historias han escuchado Y ¿Cuáles historias son las meras meras verdaderas según ustedes? O si hay capas y capas y capas de historias en qué todas merecen su lugar.

Jairo: Yo creería que, Copán tiene un papel bien importante dentro de lo que estamos hablando. Ahora es un sitio arqueológico del área residencial o el castillo, por así decirlo, y los templos de la gente maya de ese tiempo, recordemos que es el clásico. Y pues esta ciudad fue colonizada por otra ciudad que se llama Quiriguá, que está siempre en las riberas del Río Motagua, un río muy [00:23:00] importante que comunica toda la parte de las montañas de Guatemala con el Caribe. Y en Copán si hay muchas expresiones espirituales. Seguro, Anny nos va a ampliar un poco más de esto.

Pero lo que yo he visto son muchas expresiones, rituales espirituales y también, un centro de peregrinaje como tal ya fungía Copán. O sea, ya era una capital política, religiosa y cultural muy importante que está muy cerca de Esquipulas. Es increíblemente como un sitio maya tan importante del clásico está tan cerca a una ciudad, que es tan importante para todo el área mesoamericana. Es decir, desde México hasta Costa Rica, conocen al cristo negro de Esquipulas.

Y pues también algo que a mi me llama la atención relacionado a lo que acabas de decir es como, Esquipulas, pues si es un referente para la gente pues católica, la gente católica que no es maya va [00:24:00] también a Esquipulas como una forma de peregrinaje, pero, a mi me llama mucho la atención, la práctica también de la espiritualidad maya y otras espiritualidades que se llevan a cabo en Esquipulas, no?

quizás no es tan directamente relacionado con la figura que acabas de mencionar, que yo he escuchado como Ek-Chuah, sino que es esta figura de la piedra de los compadres, que es una leyenda, no?

Una leyenda de adulterio, por así decirlo, en el cual hay dos piedras que están pegadas en alusión a dos amigos que llegan al peregrinaje de cristo negro de Esquipulas y en un acto sexual, estos compadres se quedan pegados como castigo por haber cometido el adulterio. Esa es la leyenda. Y en esa piedra, pues se practica la espiritualidad maya, es decir a pocos ni siquiera un kilómetro de la de la basílica del cristo negro de Esquipulas, puedes ver esta piedra donde la gente coloca, [00:25:00] pues, sus candelas, su incienso y hay altares dedicados completamente a la espiritualidad maya dentro del mismo pueblo.

Entonces esto va un poco aunado a lo que nos decía Anny no? Como la figura de cristo negro, también es muy representativa y es la reminiscencia de algo que se practicó muy fuertemente durante la época prehispánica.

Yo no descartaría del todo, pues el valor de Ek-Chuah dentro de estas prácticas espirituales y que sí, definitivamente los españoles, trataron de tomar elementos de la de la espiritualidad maya que ya eran importantes para imponer la religión católica. Pero la gente maya, yo siempre lo digo, fue muy estratega y lo es hasta la fecha para continuar resistiendo, practicando, pues la espiritualidad tamizado con elementos católicos y con este significado profundo.

Anny: Sí, yo también voy a coincidir un poquito en el [00:26:00] tema de no descartaría la relación que se tiene con Ek-Chuah, porque está asociado con la deidad Chortí. El otro punto que tú hablabas del tema, un tanto político, sí hay algunos historiadores, políticos que justamente, enuncian este uso de figuras que está asociada con el trabajo y sobretodo, digamos a la carga y explotación laboral de los campesinos, y cómo también estas zonas fueron como fuertemente impactadas durante el tiempo de la colonia. Entonces eso, yo tampoco lo, lo descartaría y tampoco diría que es un mito. Por ejemplo, yo, sé que la antigua población de Esquipulas, fue una de las ciudades en este punto incendiadas por los españoles durante la invasión aquí a Guatemala el 1525 verdad?[00:27:00]

En el centro de la plaza de Esquipulas, según cómo lo relatan, decía que habían, cuatro árboles de de pochotl que es la ceiba, que la ceiba pues ahí si que para nosotros es un árbol sagrado, verdad? Porque bajo sus sombras, siempre se han realizado ceremonias vinculadas con prácticas agrícolas, que duraban desde el solsticio de invierno hasta el equinoccio de primavera.

Entonces se iniciaban más o menos también en esta zona por el 21 de diciembre, pero tenían ritualidades más unciosas, por ejemplo, como el 15 de enero. Y de ahí que parte que una de las fechas propicias para visitar Esquipulas sea 15 de enero. Entonces, las otras fechas de celebración que iban entre el equinoccio y el solsticio.

Del 15 de enero al 25 de febrero, más o menos 40 días. Porque en 40 días estábamos viendo que se operaba el paso del sol por el cenit en la otra banda del [00:28:00] trópico, en un punto en donde estaba hasta cierto punto equidistante del círculo máximo de la tierra, donde según la posición del sol, se tomaba la medida del tiempo en que se produciría el fenómeno de la tierra que ya fuera el fenómeno del niño o de la niña, como se le nombra, verdad?

Exactamente, se hacía esto dentro de los días comprendidos del 20 al 31 de enero, que es cuando se operan como los fenómenos en los hemisferios, y de ahí es como de donde viene esta creencia de las cabañuelas, de cuando muy va iniciando el año más o menos por ahí, entonces hay como una relación también ciclo-agrícola y por eso es que a mí no se me hace como un mito el hecho que está asociado con Ek-Chuah porque Ek-Chuah de hecho está asociado con en este, no me gusta llamarlo Dios, pero con la energía del trabajo, verdad? Porque me parece que esa es como la expresión correcta.

En cuanto a lo del señor de Esquipulas, la [00:29:00] relación de las ceremonias con la natividad de cristo, digamos, así como el establecimiento de la festividad del señor de Esquipulas el 15 de enero, pues si siguen teniendo continuidad con las formas religiosas prehispánicas en el área maya guatemalteca, los antiguos habitantes de Esquipulas, si hay un relato, de Castañeda que lo mencionan en lo en el 55 que se dice que ,

"adoraban a un Dios que era el protector de las siembras de la cosecha y del trabajo."

Esto lo dice, este historiador "que seguramente él dice no pertenecía a las deidades mesoamericanas, especialmente al panteón mexica, universado en momentos previos a la llegada de los españoles. La representación antropomorfa de las deidades no era desconocida en Mesoamérica, por el contrario, era abundante y generalizada desde Sinaloa hasta Honduras. [00:30:00] Además, 'del Dios principal,' el comenta fray Diego Durán, 'él hace como una alusión, con Tezcatlipoca, que él dice era una piedra muy relumbrante y negra como azabache obsidiano. Piedra de la que ellos hacen navajas y cuchillos para cortar.'

Además, ciudades era de palo entallada en una figura de un hombre todo negro de las sienes para abajo con la frente, narices y boca blanca, de color de indio bestia" dice él, "de algunos atavíos galanos a su indiano modo a lo primero que tenía era unos ojeras de oro y otras de plata. En el labio bajo tenía un bezote de laverde cristalino en el que está metida una pluma verde y otras veces es azul, que después de afuera parece esmeralda o rubí. Era este bezote como un geme de largo encima de coleta de caballos que tenían la cabeza. Entonces, lo que se puede apreciar en esta descripción [00:31:00] de Tezcatlipoca corresponde casi literalmente a lo que se pudo percibir como la primera figura del cristo negro, especialmente en la representación de las imágenes talladas en madera que se veneraban en las ciudades periféricas del imperio mexica. La diferencia en el atuendo de ambas deidades radican las connotaciones religiosas de cada una de las culturas, materias, simbologías, espirituales y atributos, pero en esencial es parecido e indescutible indiscutible.

Recordemos que la celebración principal, digamos de la obsidiana de Tezcatlipoca y de lo que tú mencionabas relacionado con el tema de las lluvias, pues era justamente esto, la petición para que lloviera, sobre todo por ser tierras en este punto, muy áridas, muy secas . Y bueno, yo me quedo por aquí.

Chris: Bueno, muchas gracias Anny y Jairo, para explicar un poco de eso. Entonces, [00:32:00] así, me gustaría preguntar cómo dar los cambios en los objetos de los mayas a los cristianos y la naturaleza de la peregrinación, hacia el turismo. Es una pregunta rara, pero, ¿Ustedes creen que los viejos alimentos, o energías, o antepasados todavía se alimentan?

Es decir, para vivir en un lugar ya una década que tiene una sequía, que también saqueo, que va empeorando y empeorando, poco a poco me voy pensando si hay una falta de rezos de conocimiento, de recuerdo, de memoria, de ofrendas.

Anny: Bueno, yo es en realidad esta sequía saqueo, esta crisis climática y toda la crisis alrededor de la tierra, a mí, en lo [00:33:00] personal y tanto en lo comunitario, a mí me parece que es una crisis a nivel comunitaria, nacional, mundial en donde todos los territorios, se han visto afectados. Por ejemplo, así como aquí en Guatemala, que tenemos zonas como muy áridas, muy secas, que por su propia condición geográfica en donde han estado, sin duda se ha intensificado en estos últimos años, derivado del saqueo del recurso natural, sobre todo en estas zonas del oriente de Guatemala que son montañas que están, pues ahí si que dedicadas a la explotación de material para la construcción. Hablemos de piedra, hablemos de arena, hablemos de cal, por ejemplo, y de otros elementos que son para la explotación minera.

Así como hay otros aquí en Guatemala, donde pues la zona es bastante húmeda, pero sus montañas son [00:34:00] propicias para el oro, para la plata, para el cobre, para el zinc y para otros elementos. Entonces, yo si siento que aparte de que falte de repente un toj, un pagamento, o un Xukulem, como nosotros decimos, dar la gratitud a la tierra que sin duda, pues es evidente cuando, y eso es evidencia no solo en la explotación de la tierra, sino que es evidencia en el sentir de las personas, porque usualmente, se piensa que un peregrinaje únicamente es ir a ver una figura, verdad? O una persona, una deidad, un cristo, ir a esa energía y sentir la energía para yo recargarme, sin considerar que yo al momento que también me voy a recargar de esa energía, estoy siendo un tanto extractivista muchas veces con mi práctica. Pero mi práctica también va más allá de enajenarme de qué está pasando, porque si bien es cierto, tengo ahí al cristo negro frente a mí y soy muy devota, pero entender que el cristo negro también puede estar [00:35:00] presente en las montañas, en los ríos, en los valles, en los lagos, en las cuencas y en todo eso que a mí me da de comer, en todo eso que a mí me permite vivir. Entonces, yo creo que más allá de que falta un rezo, yo sí creo que falta mucha conciencia, mucho trabajo espiritual de hacerle ver a las personas, a los peregrinos, a las peregrinas que mi ruta de peregrinaje, o sea, por donde yo paso, existe porque hay un territorio, un territorio que es ajeno a mi territorio, pero que aun así yo paso porque voy a ver algo en específico, pero que eso también tiene un impacto y que eso también tiene una responsabilidad. Preocuparme por todo lo común que pasa alrededor de de mi territorio, de mi país, del mundo, por ejemplo. Entonces, Mas allá de yo decirte si mira, Chris, falta que la gente reze, falta que la gente ofrende para que ya no haya sequía, que si bien es cierto, tiene una parte súper importante, es muy espiritual y que nosotros que [00:36:00] hemos visto que es verdad. O sea, no es un mito, no es una mentira, sino que es verdad, pero tiene que ir de la mano la ritualidad con mi práctica, tiene que ir de la mano mi discurso con lo que yo estoy haciendo y con los enunciados y los postulados que yo tengo en mi compromiso con la tierra, verdad? Osea, para mí ese es como, como el punto focal, verdad?

Jairo: Sí, Chris y Anny pues, también he de añadir que, mucho de la modernidad y la facilidad para poder llegar a establecer una ruta de peregrinaje, también, pues influye dentro de las prácticas sociales y culturales, y pues si de tal vez, una ofrenda o un rezo, también estoy de acuerdo con Anny en ese sentido, es la conciencia de las personas, no? Y no se trata en el caso de la gente, pues católica de ser anticuados y de decir, bueno, vamos a irnos callados todo el [00:37:00] camino, aunque eso es una práctica que hacía la gente antes, verdad? Lo nombro como la gente antigua de Mixco lo dice. Ya no se tiene el respeto, dice la gente, por llegar y ir en una ruta de oración y de pedir o de agradecer. Y pues, por tanto, llevar una actitud de respeto, sino que ya se toma como un viaje de excursión y puede llegar a pasar, cualquier cosa dentro de ese viaje a excepción que se visita a la basílica y se visita a cristo negro. Pero dentro de ese viaje también de muchas personas ya no toman en cuenta el significado, o siquiera la ruta en la que están atravesando, verdad?

Creo que es parte de la influencia occidental, de alguna forma de los medios también, que no han difundido pues, esta historia, porque esto que estamos hablando no te lo cuentan en los medios de comunicación.

Ni siquiera dentro de la iglesia católica. La iglesia católica te dice que está cristo negro de Esquipulas, que es un día reconocido [00:38:00] dentro de la espiritualidad, por así decirlo, guatemalteca, religiosidad popular, como querramos llamarlo, pero no te hacen este trasfondo histórico que hay dentro de él, verdad?

Pues la iglesia católica se encarga de lo litúrgico si vamos a llamarlo de esa forma, se hace una misa, se participa dentro de las misas. Pues hay frailes franciscanos que están constantemente bendiciendo lo que se compra como souvenir dentro del lugar. Pero que más que una oración que haga falta, creo que si hace falta entender un poco más que es lo que estamos haciendo, pero pues es parte del cambio socio cultural influido, como digo por lo occidental de alguna forma, que está permeando pues esta memoria histórica en cuanto a la visita del cristo negro. No digo que deje de ser fuerte porque esto tiene muchísima fuerza todavía dentro del contexto mesoamericano.

Chris: Claro, claro, [00:39:00] gracias a ustedes dos. Pues la mayoría de las pláticas en el podcast, son críticas, de lo que falta, lo que no hay, en en el mundo, en la cuestión del movimiento de viaje de devoción también, y agradecimiento.

Bueno es obvio como las dinámicas transaccionales o capitalistas, etc afectan los movimientos de la gente. Cómo se proceden, como llegan, como piensen en sus movimientos, también queremos pensar en otros mundos, y parte de eso, tiene que ver con lo que algunos llaman la hospitalidad radical. Es decir, como lo más básico, según yo, la hospitalidad local, enraizado, para el extraño o extranjero o extranjera, etc. Entonces, tengo curiosidad por saber ¿Qué tipo de hospitalidad [00:40:00] radical ustedes han encontrado en Esquipulas o en la peregrinación, si es que han encontrado algo.

Anny: Bueno, no te voy a hablar como mucho de esto, porque no tengo como una experiencia, porque no ha sido mi búsqueda también, como encontrar esto. Siento que es como un paso como más personal individual, quizá de de soledad, pero de de sentirte bien en el, así que solo, en el buen sentido.

Te puedo decir que hay gente que tiene como muchas experiencias, verdad? De de encontrarse con las personas que abren las puertas de su casa para que estén, para que visiten, para que entren. Claro, ahorita pues mucha situación ha cambiado. Siento que la seguridad ya no es la misma. La situación que atraviesa Guatemala. La conflictividad que se ha ido acrecentando en estos últimos años con estas [00:41:00] miradas fascistas también, con la división entre iglesias, por ejemplo, entre protestantes fascistas, radicales, y protestantes neopentecostales. Y todavía medio que la iglesia evangélica presbiteriana, que es la que intenta mediar entre ambas y la iglesia católica.

Todo esto, además que el oriente de Guatemala está catalogado como zonas de bastante menudeo de narco, corredores de narcotráfico también. Entonces, todas estas situaciones políticas y geopolíticas han ido modificando mucho el hecho de que tú busques tu propia protección y que la gente también, cuando no son épocas de de peregrinaje, no tiendan a abrir sus casas, sino que quizás las abren más como para cuando hay un poquito más de afluencia, pero ya es como muy poco ver este tipo de dinámicas.

Lo otro es que mucha gente mayor, digamos de la zona ya ha [00:42:00] fallecido. Y pues ha quedado como gente joven, inclusive gente que no es ya de Esquipulas, sino que por tema laboral ha migrado ahí, entonces ya va perdiendo como un sentido de pertenencia, verdad? De como ese sentido de comunidad. Pero si algo yo puedo rescatar de hace como mucho tiempo y que nos queda de repente el bonito recuerdo y la historia que quizá Jairo quiere hablar ahí un poquito, es de cómo se fueron tejiendo ciertas rutas comerciales entre por ejemplo, Oaxaca, Mixco y la gente de que aprovechaba para ir a Esquipulas.

Y también como pensar cómo fueron cambiando también los productos de consumo, porque ahora, pues, vemos una invasión de productos plásticos, verdad? Provenientes de China, de estas grandes pirámides de estafa que y de explotación de mano de obra en Malasia, que te viene producto chino también de por allá o de la india, por ejemplo. Vemos como la entrada de mucho de este, [00:43:00] de este producto, verdad?

Entonces tampoco es que podamos estar hablando como de esta comunidad, o de encontrar como redes de comunidad en cuanto a la economía o en cuanto a la producción, porque es ahí si que tú sabes que el capitalismo es voraz y la globalización y todos estos factores que están pasando en este momento son muy crueles con las dinámicas y las formas de vida de acuerparnos, de querernos, de apapacharnos y que se intensifica cada vez más.

Creo que ahí si que lo importante es, nombrarlo para que si alguien quizá no se había dado cuenta de cómo se han ido afectando las dinámicas. Pues ahora lo, se se pueda ver, verdad? Y que a veces también es un poco como egoísta de mi parte, porque ves ahí vamos al hecho de que, como yo solo lo voy una vez allá, pues no me importa al final, como si tejo o no tejo, verdad? Puede ser que sea el pensamiento de alguien, verdad? Bueno, yo [00:44:00] solo voy una vez, yo voy a lo que voy y no me importa pues si hay alguien ahí que me pueda acuerpar, recibir o lo que sea.

Entonces también como estas dinámicas, estos pensamientos frívolos que también por la misma dinámica de la vida, de la economía y demás, se intensifican no? Entonces, pues yo pues yo, eso te podría decir.

Jairo: Si, dentro de como el capitalismo, el sistema capitalista, ha influido también dentro de estas dinámicas. Yo puedo nombrar puntualmente durante las últimas veces que he ido a Esquipulas, justo desde acá de Mixco, como pues lo económico ha afectado, o sea, el nivel socioeconómico también determina lo que vas a llegar a hacer verdad? Porque muchas personas de que vienen de acá, ni siquiera pues ya piensan en hospedarse, sino que van en la noche, madrugada de un día, y se quedan en [00:45:00] el bus o solo van y peregrinan, rezan, dejan sus candelas, no se paga hotel y regresan, verdad? Eso ha sido en un par de ocasiones.

Si bien, pues hay ahora opciones de hospedaje digámoslo de diferentes tipos, que se suelen reservar con anticipación. También está esta otra situación, que también deja un poco de lado a lo que se solía hacer de preparar comida, de llevar ya huevos duros, como le decimos nosotros, huevos cocidos con salsa de tomate, eso es muy de viajar en este contexto de Mixco, los tamales de viaje que les llamaban también que es básicamente pasta de maíz cocida con la tusa, que es la cáscara del maíz. Estos tamales, pues servían para eso, para poder mermar el hambre mientras se llegaba a Esquipulas y que ahora esto ha sido poco a poco reemplazado justo lo que nombraba Anny, por productos pre-elaborados, frituras, que no tienen ningún [00:46:00] sustento, ni siquiera enlazan, con la memoria de la cocina, sino que técnicamente es algo que se desecha.

Y claro, la basura, también otro papel importante, porque tenemos poca educación o ninguna en cuanto al ambiente y las empresas que nos hacen responsables de sus paquetes, de sus sobrecitos, de sus botellas y todo esto, resulta en los caminos y, pues sí, es una ruta de peregrinaje, pero también hay basura plástica, verdad? Dentro de esa ruta de peregrinaje.

Y, pues, nombrar también, este era un poquito la cereza del del pastel que yo quería dejar para esta conversación, porque, como las dinámicas económicas han afectado rutas comerciales y de peregrinaje que puede que lleven alrededor de 2 mil años de existir, verdad? Tu que te desenvuelves en Oaxaca, puedes preguntar sobre cristo negro de Esquipulas y vas a encontrar a mucha gente que es devota al cristo negro de Esquipulas [00:47:00] y que probablemente tengan una réplica, pues en varios lugares de Oaxaca. Sobre todo el área, pues de el Istmo, verdad? En el, en el área también, zapoteca, vas a encontrar mucha gente que es devota y producto, pues de ello eso, ya lo tenemos, pues registrado antropológicamente. Ya no se da, pero gracias a las abuelas de mi pueblo esto sobrevive y es como nosotros, como Mixco estamos en medio de una ruta comercial entre básicamente, el centro de México y el oriente de Guatemala que está hacia allá.

Entonces, pues Esquipulas está casi, en un punto distinto a esta ruta, verdad?

Pues hay una memoria de de cómo nuestra gente antigua de Mixco interactuaba comercialmente con gente que venía del centro de México. Y esto lo tenemos evidente en el uso de la indumentaria maya del Poqomam de Mixco, que tiene muchísima influencia de la indumentaria que viene del pueblo [00:48:00] zapoteca, y del pueblo mixteca, en Oaxaca y producto de ello, sé que en el audio no saldrá, pero lo voy a describir.

Tenemos acá estas fajas, estas fajas vienen de santo Tomás Jalieza en Oaxaca. Las famosas fajas de Jalieza, que se utilizan en Oaxaca y que formaban parte de la indumentaria antigua de Mixco. Esto cambió más o menos a mediados de los años 60s.

Hay memoria, yo escuché de boca de muchas de las señoras antiguas de acá de mi pueblo que decían, venían las mexicanas a vendernos ropa, técnicamente, pero no es la ruta de Tapachula moderna, ahora que se va por la costa, sino que se refieren a textiles. Y esto encontramos fotos, inclusive fotografías del siglo 19, de finales del siglo 19, principios del siglo 20 en el que vemos el uso de estas fajas, y las reconocemos técnicamente por esta figura que seguro, pues ya la, la verás más representada en en Oaxaca. [00:49:00] La gente acá en Mixco le dice a esto los bailadores, en Oaxaca les tienen un nombre, ahora específicamente, no lo recuerdo, pero es gracias a este danzante o bailador que reconocemos las fajas que vienen de ese lugar porque en Guatemala no encuentras ninguna otra faja que sea de este material, porque es lana, o bien puede ser bastante grueso el tejido en telar de cintura con estos diseños.

Entonces, gracias a Abisaí Navarro, que ojalá pueda escuchar este material, es un amigo que es de Oaxaca, quien conocí por las redes sociales, en quien básicamente se ha dedicado a documentar las expresiones culturales también de Oaxaca y de la espiritualidad en los pueblos mixteca y zapoteca. Y él me envió estas fajas desde Oaxaca. Osea, yo ya no puedo decir las compré con señoras oaxaqueñas. Yo como mixqueño, no las compré con ellas porque ahora vienen en bus, la dinámica comercial cambió y además en Mixco ya no se usa la [00:50:00] indumentaria maya, de uso diario. Este es por un lado, y por el otro lado, también tenemos a este otro lugar que se llama Yalalag, que es gente zapoteca también, en el cual usan esta prenda sobre la cabeza, ellos le llaman tlacoyales o rodetes, que consiste pues en lana cruda, de de oveja teñida, colocado sobre la cabeza, que es la emulación, pues a una serpiente.

Esto, pues, tampoco esto no lo traje de Oaxaca, esto lo conseguí pues gracias a una historiadora justamente de Chichicastenango que Anny conoce, María Jacinta Xón, ella pues su papá se dedicó muchísimo tiempo, y ella también se ha dedicado, pues a la elaboración de hilos y a la obtención de la seda, y el papá de ella que ya descansa, pues fue con quien pudimos investigar un poco de dónde venía esta lana. Esta lana ya no se produce ni siquiera en Chichicastenango, en el contexto de Anny, sino [00:51:00] que básicamente esta es la última que él tuvo la oportunidad de teñir, pero es exactamente la misma lana que inclusive él desconocía su procedencia sin pintar, de dónde venía.

Y ahora esto ni siquiera aquí en Guatemala se consigue, entonces es la evidencia de cómo Mixco en medio de una ruta comercial entre básicamente todo el área de el Istmo y la costa sur hacia el oriente de Guatemala, que es otro mundo que, de no haber llegado la invasión española y de no haber este sistema que de alguna forma ha ladinizado decimos nosotros, o sea despojado de su identidad a la gente maya. Y, pues, tendríamos una gran diversidad también de personas en aquel territorio. Y pues es un poco de las dos prendas que acá en Mixco se utilizan todavía por las mujeres que participan en las cofradías, pero los nos hace pensar en las mujeres de Oaxaca también. Es bien curioso. Tengo un video que lo describe, si gustan lo pueden ver allá en mis redes sociales, [00:52:00] aparezco como "hoja de pacaya" y hay un video donde hablo de esto del tecoyal justamente.

Anny: Si, Chris y algo que yo, quería como agregar nada más a la conversación. Es el hecho de que, en medio de esta forma de turismo que muchas veces es gentrificador y que también como que estas dinámicas de ir y venir hace que justamente todo alrededor de lo que sucede en Esquipulas pues cambie su dinámica

Si bien es cierto, ahora cuando vas tú a Esquipulas, ya hay hoteles de repente, tal vez no de cadena, pero si de cinco estrellas. La gente ha intentado mantener hoteles que sean como de su familia. Pero eso no quita, por ejemplo, que ya haya más lugares de recreación, de consumo, de compra y de intercambio comercial.

Porque pues tú sabes que al final, la situación económica, creo que a nivel mundial no es del todo buena para ninguno, [00:53:00] verdad? Entonces, pues siempre se busca la manera como de irte agenciando de ciertos fondos. Pero, ahora que lo pienso mejor, digamos en esta conversación, yo si puedo ver algo muy especial.

Por ejemplo, aquí en Guatemala, hay dos lugares más en donde hay peregrinación a ver a cristo negro, que no tienes que ir a Esquipulas y que lo encuentras, aquí, de de donde yo vivo más o menos es a una hora, se llama Chinique de Las Flores. Y luego de Chinique de Las Flores a más o menos como unas tres horas, puedes llegar a Cunén. Cunén, también aquí en K'iche', que son estas, rutas de peregrinación para ir a ver también, réplicas del cristo negro de Esquipulas, pero que entonces ahí si te puedo decir que estamos encontrando aquello que una vez encontramos en Esquipulas [00:54:00] hace más de 400 años por así decirlo, 300 años.

Entonces, lo estamos volviendo a encontrar ahí porque, claro, son zonas todavía de pronto un poco más pequeñas, en donde todavía el ambiente es más, comunal, comunitario, en donde, pues todavía es de pueblo, le decimos nosotros, todavía sí que está la esencia conservada de un pueblo. Entonces no se convierte en un lugar para ir a quedarte y pasar ahí una semana, que sé yo, sino que se convierte en un lugar de visita, de recogimiento de sí, ir a hacer tu tu peregrinaje, tu oración, tu penitencia.

Entonces, a mí me parece que ahí todavía es en donde, donde se encuentra una esencia muy, muy rica.

Chris: Pues, gracias a las energías, a los dioses y dioses que todavía hay lugares y gente que honran esas, esas tradiciones y las de también como Jairo [00:55:00] mencionó, que pues la memoria también está pegado dentro del textil, de tejido, justo tambien he visto como una una bebida chocolatosa tradicional aquí en Oaxaca que, según algunas personas tiene su origen en en el K'iche'. Aunque, se dice que ese proceso, esa receta no existe en el K'iche' ahora, pero todavía la memoria existe dentro de esas prácticas no?

Entonces la cuestión de la hiper movilidad y el sentido de guerra constante en muchos sentidos en el el mundo contemporáneo, ¿Cómo piensan que, la peregrinación o las posibilidades de peregrinar pueden ofrecernos una manera, o maneras, o caminos a [00:56:00] socobar, la hiper movilidad, a la guerra, la comida chatarra como mencionaron, estas dinámicas y estructuras económicas que, pues nos están matando poco a poco? ¿Qué clave puede tener la peregrinación en un mundo donde queremos vivir?

Anny: Pues yo creo que la responsabilidad de cada uno de nosotros que, que vamos con llevar también mensajes de esperanza, o sea, siempre hay rutas no? Está la ruta migratoria, está la ruta de la mariposa monarca. Está que esa peregrinación que hacen, van y vienen, y estas peregrinaciones que nosotros también hacemos como personas humanas, independientemente de si seamos cristianos o no, pero siempre hay una ruta que tú buscas de peregrinaje para sanar tus [00:57:00] dolores, tus enfermedades, tus traumas, tus miedos, así sea que tú vayas a peregrinar a una montaña, un volcán, un cerro, a una iglesia, a una basílica a donde sea.

A mí lo importante, y lo que me parece a mi súper esperanzador es que tú tengas como también ese compromiso de compartir una luz con quienes tú te vayas encontrando en el camino. Puede ser que también tu peregrinaje entonces no parta desde el hecho de, ah voy a ir pensando solo en rezos, no, sino que, ¿Qué también puedo yo compartir en el camino?

O sea que otras rutas también puedo ir yo dejando, mencionando, creo que esto lo hemos logrado con bastante efectividad cuando pensamos en las rutas migratorias y como podemos echarle una mano a les compas migrantes verdad?, Entonces a mí me parecería que una estrategia pues muy parecida, podría ayudar bastante, a ver esto con otros ojos y a ver esto, pues más allá de, [00:58:00] o sea, que que siempre podemos hacer varias cosas, cuando tenemos de repente solo una finalidad, pero al final podemos ir haciendo como mucho, entonces yo creo que como mensaje yo, eso te dejaría, o sea que, pues al final en medio de toda esta hiper movilidad, pues que la aprovechemos, no solo para quemar codos, sino para ir dejando otros mensajes a la gente, verdad? De cómo también nos vamos moviendo, movilizando, qué vamos pensando y qué está pasando alrededor del mundo.

Jairo: Sí, bueno, entender que nuestras dinámicas han cambiado con el tiempo, que somos una generación que nos tocó ver cambios abismales dentro de las dinámicas de como nos hemos relacionado con otras personas, cómo aprendemos incluso porque ahora pues gracias a la hiper movilidad también, inclusive, pues a la tecnología conocemos nuevas cosas, pero no dejar de lado el en el caso, pues de la gente que peregrina, verdad? Las [00:59:00] reflexiones que hacíamos, el por qué se hace, un poquito, y también el que hacer de nosotros cuando vamos a un lugar y cuando nos movemos, verdad?

El hecho de verdad estoy comprando con las personas que son de allí o me estoy yendo a meter un supermercado, de verdad esto beneficia la comunidad o esto beneficia a una empresa, pues que al final explota personas y que les compra super barato y regateado el producto, verdad? Creo que se ha mantenido, pues al menos en Esquipulas esa dinámica de consumir, pues lo que es de allí, la gente, pues esfuerza mucho porque saben que hay, personas de muchos contextos que vienen a ese lugar, por lo menos una vez al año. Entonces, entender estas dinámicas, creo que es un reto también dentro de nuestro contexto y entender también que el humano siempre se ha movido.

Gracias a las personas [01:00:00] antiguas que se movieron hace 3 mil años hacia acá es que nosotros tenemos estas evidencias históricas y aprender de esas movilidades también, cómo nosotros generamos un buen impacto cuando nos estamos moviendo, pienso.

Chris: Que vamos aprendiendo y recordando a la vez, cómo movernos con respeto y agradecimiento y devoción a lo que nos da vida. Vamos a asegurar que las imágenes de esos textiles hermosas, van a salir con el episodio, en el sitio web web de El Fin del Turismo. Y también los nombres y contactos si quieren de los compas que mencionaste Jairo.

Y pues ha sido como un gran conversación, y me dan muchas ganas de seguir con esa [01:01:00] cuestión de peregrinación.

Y en el nombre de de nuestros oyentes, me gustaría ofrecerles mis a agradecimientos más sinceros a ambos ustedes por acompañarnos hoy, y estar dispuestos a enfrentar y luchar con algunas de las contradicciones y pues también las colonizaciones que han afectado al acto y al arte de la peregrinación en nuestros tiempos.

Si los oyentes tienen ganas a conocer más de lo que ustedes hacen en la vida, ¿Hay una manera de comunicar o conectar?

Anny: Sí, por supuesto, en nuestras redes personales, yo soy la curadora en jefe actual de Espacio C, en Chichicastenango, entonces pues por ahí pueden , encontrarme en Instagram, o en Facebook, se escribe [01:02:00] ESPACIO/C ARTE+MEMORIA. Y luego en mis redes personales, por si alguien pues también desea buscar. Yo me encuentro en Instagram como "Anny Puac," así me pueden encontrar a mí también en Instagram para que pues vean, de pronto un poquito también de, de mi trabajo y, luego en nuestras redes comerciales como Los Cofrades Chichicastenango, así me pueden, nos pueden ir encontrando y pues ahora Jairo.

Jairo: Gracias. Yo he tratado de crear contenido no de lleno, tampoco tan comercial. He hecho reflexiones en cuanto a estos elementos, ahí sí que de ambos lados, verdad? De la espiritualidad en Guatemala en general, tanto de lo católico como de lo maya, y cómo esto tiene un punto medular, es un poquito lo que ha sido mi [01:03:00] premisa durante los últimos años, evidenciar que no es netamente todo católico, cristiano y que hay elementos pues de la espiritualidad maya que prevalecen como lo que hablamos hoy.

Me pueden encontrar pues, como Hoja de Pacaya en las redes sociales. La hoja de pacaya es la que se usa para decorar en las puertas de las fiestas acá en el contexto pues de Guatemala. La pacaya es una palma. También se come la flor durante los viajes, justo durante los peregrinajes. La flor de la pacaya se envuelve con huevo y se le pone salsa de tomate encima y es algo muy para viajar. Y pues, a la hoja de pacaya le dicen dentro del contexto guatemalteco a las personas que les gusta la fiesta y que no se pierden ninguna.

Entonces es un poco la premisa de mi usuario, porque pues sí, me gusta documentar las fiestas, pues que se llevan a cabo en Guatemala con trasfondo, quizá de análisis [01:04:00] y de reflexión. Y pues, gracias por el espacio. Estoy muy agradecido por ello, a ambos.

Chris: De nuevo, muchísimas gracias a ustedes dos por sus tiempos hoy, por sus reflexiones y sus compromisos en el mundo, en la vida.

Anny: Qué gusto conocerte también. Y pues ahí estamos siempre en comunicación. Yo te de con un fuerte abrazo y no haber un fuerte abrazo a tierra que de Oaxaca también.

Leave a comment

Subscribe now

English Transcription

Chris: [00:00:00] Welcome to the podcast The End of Tourism Annie and Jairo. Thank you both for joining me today. I would love for you to tell our listeners where you are calling from and what the world looks like there for each of you.

Anny: Thank you very much, Chris, and good morning to everyone listening, or good afternoon or good evening, depending on your time zone.

My name is Anny and I greet you from the K'iche' Mayan territory of Chuwila, K'iche' Guatemala specifically.

Jairo: Good morning to both of you, it's a pleasure to be here. Sawe ta inteer winaq (Good morning to all of you) a pleasure from the Poqomam territory of Mixco and also from the outskirts of Guatemala City, thank you for this [00:01:00] opportunity to share knowledge.

Chris: And thank you both. I'm here in Oaxaca and the world seems obviously a little weird. Well, maybe not obviously, but it seems weirder by the day. We're here today to talk about Esquipulas in Guatemala. And Esquipulas is the site of several churches that have housed the Black Christ of the town, which is famous for its supposed miracles for the past four centuries.

Similarly, the pilgrimage to the shrine is the largest in Central America and the second largest in the Americas, with, from what I read, 5 million people visiting it every year. Now, to start, would you be willing to explain what prompted each of [00:02:00] your interests or relationships with this place and the practice of pilgrimage?

Anny: Yes, of course Chris. Well, from my personal or individual relationship as a family, I have, let's say, a clear idea of when these pilgrimages began, suddenly, when I was about seven or eight years old, so, to tell you that I have clarity, but when I go back to the family archives, well, I see that the issue of going on pilgrimage to Esquipulas, well, it begins with my grandmothers.

Jairo: So I could tell you that within my family, the pilgrimage to Esquipulas, well, maybe it has been present in the family for at least 80 years, especially on my maternal grandmother's side . She is from a K'iche' territory in Quetzaltenango , where they would begin the trip, together, there was a neighborhood trip organized by the neighborhood, or it was a family trip, so one or two buses would go at that time when there wasn't much transportation, right? It was also a luxury to go by some route where there was a bus stop. And well, what couldn't be traveled by bus, well, it was done on foot, they used donkeys, but, more or less that's where the story of how these pilgrimage routes began in my family, let's say.

In our case, I was not aware of having arrived in Esquipulas when I was little. Well, there is a very interesting fact, when I was 40 days old, my family decided to take me to [00:04:00] Esquipulas, so that is in the family's photo archive as a thank you, because in the end I was born with... I was born well.

Jairo: And then the family decides to go on a pilgrimage. This is the closest information I have about the person going to Esquipulas. Of course, I have always been very familiar with this within my immediate context, since people from my municipality tend to go organized in excursions from the different religious organizations that exist in my municipality.

These, well, designate dates and are buses filled with approximately 50 people. Each bus usually arrives up to three, from here in Mixco, well, they go to Esquipulas. And that is something very interesting because it is, well, part of modernity, let's say going by bus, but there are many anecdotes from people from here in town who [00:05:00] tell how, well, they went in a more rustic way, right? It could be, well, on a walking pilgrimage, which was not the only pilgrimage, in fact that of the black Christ of Esquipulas. Today, specifically, we are going to talk about it.

But there are also the pilgrimages to Antigua Guatemala, which is very close by. Here behind us there is a hill called Alux Hill. This hill was crossed on foot, and people still do so on foot, because behind the hill is the descent to get to Antigua Guatemala.

Chris: Thank you. Thank you all. So, to learn a little more about your stories, like the pilgrimage, I would like to know a little more if you could offer something about the long history of Esquipulas, of the black Christ and well, how did the pilgrimage originate? Where does that story come from?

Jairo: Well, as I mentioned before, saying some [00:06:00] words in the Poqomam language. It is the language that was spoken, well, in our town. I'm going to say it again more slowly to, well, describe to you what I said, technically it is:

closely related and intrinsic to the people of Mixco and also to the Oaxacan territory.

My name is Jairo, Jairo Andrés Chamale Lemus. I belong to this territory, to the Poqomam Mayan people. Half of my family and my ancestors are from here. And, well, I am dedicated to tourism. I have been a tourist guide for approximately eight years , since I graduated very young. And, well, I have dedicated myself to pilgrimages so that people also learn about the historical context of Guatemala and the different cultural, religious and also resistance expressions of the people in the territory of what we now know as Guatemala.

Well, I am also a student of anthropology, specifically a bachelor's degree in anthropology, and I have also dedicated myself to studying the case of the Poqomam Mayan language in Mixco, which is a community very close to Guatemala City, which has had a very strong demographic and social impact, due to the growth of the metropolitan area of Guatemala City. It is something that I have dedicated myself to studying during the last few years. And also, well, to [00:08:00] documenting it, because we have many cultural and spiritual practices in our town, which have been disappearing as the city's demographic advances, thank you very much. Rontyoox aq'oo ta

Anny: Well Chris . In fact there is a record, let's say historical , which says that the first pilgrimage to Esquipulas was in March 1595 , when the image left the workshop of this sculptor Quirio Cataño, heading towards Esquipulas, towards Chiquimula. This is in the east of Guatemala. We know it as the hot zone of Guatemala. But it is the zone, let's say, like hot arid . It is a territory where there is a Xinca, Popti' community, if I'm not mistaken, Chortí as well . And so, the production that is [00:09:00] They have in the lands over there, we are talking about fruits from some plants, some tubers more or less, but most of them are dedicated to fruit, right ?

This first pilgrimage is documented and recorded by the chronicler, who is called Miguel Álvarez. And he says that, when he left from the workshop and headed towards Esquipulas, the image was performing different miracles along the way until reaching the basilica . Then there were people who asked him precisely that, please, that the image spend at least one night inside the house of people to bless it. And more or less it is estimated every year, let's say currently, now in Guatemala and around 300 thousand people from all over the world, mostly between Mexico, Central America, southern countries, for example from Peru [00:10:00] from Ecuador from Ecuador, Bolivia, if I'm not mistaken, it is like a lot of people who arrive, more or less between November, which right now is like a date from November to December and all of January, let's say, those are like the three months with the greatest influx of people who arrive at the basilica, right? So you can call it a pilgrimage , you can call it a pilgrimage, what pilgrimage, usually, well there if the people who visit can do like a day's visit only or it can be that a visit can be extended for up to 10, 15 days, right?

From Guatemala City to Esquipulas there is a distance of approximately 220 to 250 kilometers and if you go on a pilgrimage, you go through very specific places along the entire pilgrimage, on average [00:11:00] Every day you are doing a stretch of 40 kilometers, a day, let's say if your intention is to go on a pilgrimage like that . So that's more or less like more historical data and the story, right?

Chris: And I'm a little curious, inside the estancias, when I arrive at Esquipulas, if I were on a pilgrimage, for example, what would I do? Do they stop to say their prayers? I would like to know from someone who has never made a pilgrimage, how it looked those days before coming.

Anny: Well, I'm going to tell you a little bit about my family's story because My maternal grandmother, she was a lady, very Catholic, right? So, for her, her pilgrimage, let's say, was her sacrifice, right? In the year, to say well, out of gratitude [00:12:00] to my health, to the miracles that she granted me, because she was very devout. It was the fact of going on a pilgrimage route. What did this imply? Even preparing food so as to not say waste time, thinking about what to eat along the way, because the idea for them was, well, to go in a kind of contemplation, in constant prayer, in prayer, let's say in petition, to stop every so often, right? Every 40 kilometers, because within the Catholic-Christian community, there are points that are marked within the route where you can stop with each family, because they may have a replica of the image of the black Christ, because in fact, when the first pilgrimage was, this family may have been one of the [00:13:00] families who first received the black Christ.

So it becomes like that stopping point, right? So, when they make that stopping point, they go down. They go down to pray, they go down to talk and to socialize with people, maybe, to share a meal. And to feel, well, like their faith, their devotion, but at the same time their coexistence, their joy in this, in this part of sharing, right?

So that's what we usually see. I've also seen other people who, for example, when there are some left, for example, the last 20 kilometers of the journey, get out of their vehicles and walk on their knees for those 20 kilometers until they reach the basilica. So, you see them, it could be just the father with the son, or the father and the mother, or the diversity of people who can arrive, who go and do their penance, and [00:14:00] They offer their sacrifice in this way, let's say. Just like there are people who, during their entire pilgrimage route, there is an example of some, of some people close to us who have a marimba group, a music group, and what they do is they go with a vehicle and play music all the way until they get to Esquipulas, and when they get to the basilica, they get out with their instruments and they dedicate themselves to singing a song, a beat, right?

So, I think it depends, it varies a lot on what you can dedicate yourself to or the gratitude you want to give, or what, well, what your heart says, right? In my case, I'm very specific, because we made the entire 220-kilometer journey by vehicle until we reached Esquipulas.

And then, well, there, I mean, we establish ourselves [00:15:00] and as our dynamics are somewhat different because I am not Catholic. I am from the Mayan worldview, and well, that is where I have grown up a good part of my life. My conception of how to see this pilgrimage route is different, because while it is true that the black Christ, well, is a figure of a crucified Christian Christ, Jesus, we learned to see how the history of the Poptí and Chorti and Chortí people, in terms of this pilgrimage route is very interesting, because throughout your entire route more or less, I would dare to say that perhaps 70% of the route, you find mountains of obsidian, so it is a route that in itself is a route of healing and for us, let's say within the Mayan worldview it is closely related to the Nahual Tijax, which is obsidian and for [00:16:00] Perhaps a good part of Oaxaca or its Isthmus or the Nahuatl culture, for example, is related to Tezcatlipoca , who was precisely this veneration of this woman who they said was brilliant and copper-colored and black-colored, right?

And so, you know that both stones or these stories that they tell us, are precisely healing and that is why we believe that is why the black Christ is so miraculous when it comes to health issues.

Jairo: From our side, so to speak, it is already part of a pilgrimage that is not only done on January 15th. Of course, January 15th is the day established to do the Black Christ pilgrimage of Esquipulas. But well, many of the groups that I mentioned that are quite diverse here in Mixco, religious groups mainly Catholic, or well syncretized in some way, also establish these visits as part of their organization within the group of people who influence them.

And then yes, right inside the bus, it is also usual to pray the rosary, which is this practice of praying the novenas in an established order with songs and the people, well, they usually go from when they leave Guatemala City or from when they leave here from Mixco, which you have to cross the city and then the route to the east of Guatemala, people say these prayers every so often, but it depends a lot on the group and how Catholic they are in some way, because there are groups that only do it as an excursion of course. The main purpose is the visit, well, to the Basilica of the Black Christ and the veneration of the Black Christ as such.

And, well, they only get to the basilica by bus and something that characterizes the culture of [00:18:00] Mixco is the burning of gunpowder. We are fascinated by gunpowder and when we get to Esquipulas, that is precisely the premise, right? Burning sound bombs, with a shrill sound, as a warning that the people of Mixco have arrived.

And also colored fireworks. It is quite curious because it depends a lot on the group and what the group, even if it is Catholic or syncretized with the Mayan, what this group is religiously dedicated to, the activity that is going to be carried out there is directed towards that.

I know of a group that has actually been documented thanks to CECEG, the Center for Cultural Studies at the University of San Carlos in Guatemala. It is the group El Baile de Moros de los Seis Toritos, which is basically a traditional dance group that was born in the village of Lo De Bran, which is here in Mixco, always within [00:19:00] the metropolitan area, and they dedicate themselves to dancing El Torito. El Torito is basically a representation of a dance that is done in reference to the owners of a farm and the treatment of animals. So the animals have a kind of revelation against this owner of the farm, a story well, subtly told from the Mayan perspective as well. And so they go to do this representation of the dance in Esquipulas. They do this precisely for the feast of the Black Christ. They dance all day, for three days in a row in front of the atrium of the church in Esquipulas, while millions of people visit the Basilica of the Black Christ and at that moment they are dancing there.

Chris: How fascinating. I love that sense, that vibe that there is so much diversity in the form, the paths, the celebrations that it kind of denies [00:20:00] that Western sense that is always assuming or looking for a single answer, a single story, a single way of acting, of understanding.

And so it was surprising for me to read, to research the stories of Esquipulas and the pilgrimages because I found many different stories. So I'm going to read a little of what I found and I'd like to hear from you, if you could comment a little on whether there is a sense of "that's like pure gossip or a rumor" or if there are layers and layers within the stories of Esquipulas and the pilgrimages.

So, the first one is that "in the sacred city of Copán, great festivals were held in honor [00:21:00] of the Mayan god Ek-Kampulá, which means 'he who pushes the clouds,' since he was credited with the power to keep away the rain and allow the days of sun necessary to prepare the planting.

Ek-Kampulá, who was black in color, was surrounded by a torch in his left hand. His figure can be seen in the temples of one of the Copán temples."

Now, the second one.

"Some accounts say that the black Christ figure was ordered by the Spanish conquistadors in Guatemala at that time to facilitate the conversion of the local peoples to Christianity."

Now, next.

"Pious legends claim that the image was darkened by Spanish missionaries who wished to convert the [00:22:00] natives who worshipped the pagan nebulous deity Ek-Kampulá in the area who was also depicted as a dark figure."

So, I guess my question is like, how many of these stories have you heard and which stories are the absolute true ones according to you? Or are there layers and layers and layers of stories that all deserve their place?

Jairo: I think that Copán has a very important role in what we are talking about. Now it is an archaeological site of the residential area or the castle, so to speak, and the temples of the Mayan people of that time, let us remember that it is the classic one. And so this city was colonized by another city called Quiriguá, which is always on the banks of the Motagua River, a very [00:23:00] important river that connects the entire part of the mountains of Guatemala with the Caribbean. And in Copán there are many spiritual expressions. Sure, Anny will tell us a little more about this.

But what I have seen are many expressions, spiritual rituals and also, Copán already served as a pilgrimage center as such. In other words, it was already a very important political, religious and cultural capital that is very close to Esquipulas . It is incredible how such an important Mayan site from the Classic period is so close to a city that is so important for the entire Mesoamerican area. That is to say, from Mexico to Costa Rica, they know the Black Christ of Esquipulas.

And well, something that also draws my attention related to what you just said is how, Esquipulas, well, if it is a reference for Catholic people, Catholic people who are not Mayan also go [00:24:00] to Esquipulas as a form of pilgrimage, but, what draws my attention a lot is also the practice of Mayan spirituality and other spiritualities that take place in Esquipulas, right?

Perhaps it is not so directly related to the figure you just mentioned, which I have heard as Ek-Chuah, but rather it is this figure of the stone of the compadres, which is a legend, right?

A legend of adultery, so to speak, in which there are two stones that are stuck together in allusion to two friends who arrive at the pilgrimage of the Black Christ of Esquipulas and in a sexual act, these friends are stuck together as punishment for having committed adultery. That is the legend. And on that stone, well, Mayan spirituality is practiced, that is to say, a few kilometers from the Basilica of the Black Christ of Esquipulas, you can see this stone where people place, [00:25:00] Well, their candles, their incense and there are altars dedicated completely to Mayan spirituality within the same town.

So this is a bit related to what Anny was telling us, right? Like the figure of the black Christ, it is also very representative and is reminiscent of something that was practiced very strongly during the pre-Hispanic era.

I would not completely dismiss the value of Ek-Chuah within these spiritual practices and yes, definitely the Spanish tried to take elements of Mayan spirituality that were already important to impose the Catholic religion. But the Mayan people, I always say, were very strategic and are still so to this day in continuing to resist, practicing spirituality filtered with Catholic elements and with this deep meaning.

Anny: Yes, I also agree a little on the [00:26:00] issue of not ruling out the relationship with Ek-Chuah, because it is associated with the Chortí deity. The other point that you spoke about on the subject, somewhat political, yes there are some historians, politicians who precisely, state this use of figures that is associated with work and above all, let's say the burden and labor exploitation of the peasants, and how these areas were also strongly impacted during colonial times. So that, I would not rule it out either and I would not say that it is a myth. For example, I know that the ancient town of Esquipulas was one of the cities at this point burned by the Spanish during the invasion here in Guatemala in 1525, right? [00:27:00]

In the center of the Esquipulas plaza, according to how they tell it, there were four pochotl trees, which are called ceiba trees. The ceiba is a sacred tree for us, right? Because under their shadows, ceremonies linked to agricultural practices have always been performed, which lasted from the winter solstice to the spring equinox.

So they started more or less in this area around December 21st, but they had more elaborate rituals, for example, on January 15th. And that is why one of the best dates to visit Esquipulas is January 15th. So, the other dates of celebration were between the equinox and the solstice.

From January 15 to February 25, more or less 40 days. Because in 40 days we were seeing the sun passing through the zenith on the other side of the [00:28:00] tropics, at a point where it was to a certain extent equidistant from the great circle of the earth, where depending on the position of the sun, the measurement of time was taken in which the earth phenomenon would occur, whether it was the El Niño or La Niña phenomenon, as it is called, right?

Exactly, this was done within the days from January 20th to 31st, which is when the phenomena in the hemispheres operate, and that is where this belief of the cabañuelas comes from, from when the year is beginning more or less around there, so there is also a cycle-agricultural relationship and that is why it does not seem like a myth to me that it is associated with Ek-Chuah because Ek-Chuah is in fact associated with this, I don't like to call it God, but with the energy of work, right? Because it seems to me that that is like the correct expression.

As for the Lord of Esquipulas, the [00:29:00] relationship of the ceremonies with the nativity of Christ, let's say, as well as the establishment of the festival of the Lord of Esquipulas on January 15, well, if they continue to have continuity with the pre-Hispanic religious forms in the Guatemalan Mayan area, the ancient inhabitants of Esquipulas, if there is a story, by Castañeda that mentions it in what is said in 55 that,

"they worshipped a God who was the protector of crops, harvest and work."

This is what this historian says, "who surely he says did not belong to the Mesoamerican deities, especially to the Mexica pantheon, universalized in times prior to the arrival of the Spanish. The anthropomorphic representation of the deities was not unknown in Mesoamerica, on the contrary, it was abundant and widespread from Sinaloa to Honduras. [00:30:00] Furthermore, 'of the main God,' comments Friar Diego Durán, 'he makes an allusion, with Tezcatlipoca, who he says was a very shiny and black stone like obsidian jet. Stone from which they make razors and knives to cut.'

In addition, cities were made of wood carved into a figure of a man all black from the temples down with a forehead, nose and white mouth, the color of an Indian beast" he says, "with some elegant attire in his Indian way. The first thing he had was some gold and sometimes silver eye rings. On the lower lip he had a crystalline green lip plug in which a green feather was inserted and sometimes it is blue, which after the outside looks like an emerald or ruby. This lip plug was like a long gem above the ponytail that had the head. Then, what can be seen in this description [00:31:00] Tezcatlipoca corresponds almost literally to what could be perceived as the first figure of the black Christ, especially in the representation of the images carved in wood that were venerated in the peripheral cities of the Mexica empire. The difference in the attire of both deities lies in the religious connotations of each of the cultures, materials, symbols, spiritualities and attributes, but in essence it is similar and undeniably indisputable.

Let us remember that the main celebration, let us say of the obsidian of Tezcatlipoca and of what you mentioned related to the theme of rain, was precisely this, the request for rain, especially because the lands at this point are very arid, very dry. And well, I'll stop here.

Chris: Well, thank you very much Anny and Jairo, for explaining a little bit of that. So, [00:32:00] so, I would like to ask how you give the changes in the objects from the Mayans to the Christians and the nature of the pilgrimage, towards tourism. It's a weird question, but, do you think that the old foods, or energies, or ancestors are still being fed?

That is to say, living in a place that has been experiencing a drought for a decade, that also suffers from looting, that is getting worse and worse, little by little I am beginning to wonder if there is a lack of prayers, of knowledge, of remembrance, of memory, of offerings.

Anny: Well, I think it's actually this drought, looting, this climate crisis and the whole crisis around the land, to me, on a personal level and both at the community level, it seems to me that it is a crisis at the community, national, and global level where all territories have been affected. For example, here in Guatemala, we have very arid, very dry areas, which due to their own geographical condition where they have been, have undoubtedly intensified in recent years, derived from the looting of natural resources, especially in these areas of eastern Guatemala that are mountains that are, well, there they are dedicated to the exploitation of materials for construction. Let's talk about stone, let's talk about sand, let's talk about lime, for example, and other elements that are for mining exploitation.

Just as there are others here in Guatemala, where the area is quite humid, but its mountains are [00:34:00] conducive to gold, silver, copper, zinc and other elements. So, I do feel that apart from the sudden lack of a toj , a pagomento, or a Xukulem , as we say, giving gratitude to the land, which is undoubtedly evident when, and that is evident not only in the exploitation of the land, but it is evidence in the feelings of the people, because usually, it is thought that a pilgrimage is only going to see a figure, right? Or a person, a deity, a Christ, going to that energy and feeling the energy to recharge myself, without considering that at the moment that I am also going to recharge myself with that energy, I am being somewhat extractivist many times with my practice. But my practice also goes beyond alienating myself from what is happening, because while it is true, I have the black Christ there in front of me and I am very devout, but understanding that the black Christ can also be [00:35:00] present in the mountains, in the rivers, in the valleys, in the lakes, in the basins and in all that which gives me food, in all that which allows me to live. So, I believe that beyond the lack of prayer, I do believe that there is a lack of awareness, a lot of spiritual work to make people, pilgrims, men and women, see that my pilgrimage route, that is, where I pass through, exists because there is a territory, a territory that is foreign to my territory, but that I still pass through because I am going to see something specific, but that also has an impact and that also entails a responsibility. Worrying about all the common things that happen around my territory, my country, the world, for example. So, Mas Beyond me telling you, look, Chris, people need to pray, people need to make offerings so that there is no more drought, which, while it is true, has a super important part, it is very spiritual and we who [00:36:00] We have seen that it is true. I mean, it is not a myth, it is not a lie, it is true, but the ritual has to go hand in hand with my practice, my discourse has to go hand in hand with what I am doing and with the statements and postulates that I have in my commitment to the land, right? I mean, for me that is like, like the focal point, right?

Jairo: Yes, Chris and Anny, well, I must also add that, much of modernity and the ease of being able to establish a pilgrimage route, also, influences social and cultural practices, and well, if perhaps, an offering or a prayer, I also agree with Anny in that sense, it is the conscience of the people, right? And it is not a question, in the case of Catholic people, of being old-fashioned and saying, well, let's keep quiet all the [00:37:00] Camino, although that is a practice that people did before, right? I name it as the old people of Mixco say it. There is no longer respect, people say, for arriving and going on a route of prayer and asking or giving thanks. And so, therefore, you have to have an attitude of respect, but rather it is taken as an excursion and anything can happen within that trip except visiting the basilica and visiting Cristo Negro. But within that trip, many people no longer take into account the meaning, or even the route they are going through, right?

I think it is part of the Western influence, and in some ways the media as well, which has not spread this story, because what we are talking about is not told to you in the media.

Not even within the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church tells you that there is a Black Christ of Esquipulas, which is a day recognized [00:38:00] within the spirituality, so to speak, of Guatemala, popular religiosity, whatever we want to call it, but they don't give you this historical background that exists within it, right?

Well, the Catholic Church is in charge of the liturgical aspect, if we are going to call it that way. There is a mass, people participate in the masses. There are Franciscan friars who are constantly blessing what people buy as souvenirs inside the place. But more than a prayer, I think we need to understand a little more about what we are doing, but it is part of the sociocultural change influenced, as I say, by the West in some way, which is permeating this historical memory regarding the visit of the black Christ. I am not saying that it is not strong anymore, because this still has a lot of strength within the Mesoamerican context.

Chris: Sure, sure, [00:39:00] thanks to both of you. Well, most of the conversations in the podcast are criticisms, about what is missing, what is not there, in the world, in the matter of the devotional journey movement as well, and gratitude.

Well, it's obvious how transactional or capitalist dynamics, etc. affect people's movements. How they proceed, how they arrive, how they think about their movements, we also want to think about other worlds, and part of that has to do with what some call radical hospitality. That is, as the most basic, according to me, local, rooted hospitality, for the stranger or foreigner, etc. So, I'm curious to know what kind of radical hospitality [00:40:00] you have found in Esquipulas or on the pilgrimage, if you have found anything.

Anny: Well, I'm not going to tell you much about this, because I don't have any experience, because it hasn't been my search either, to find this. I feel that it's like a more personal, individual step, perhaps of solitude, but of feeling good in it, so alone, in a good way.

I can tell you that there are people who have had many experiences, right? Of meeting people who open the doors of their house for them to stay, for them to visit, for them to come in. Of course, right now a lot of the situation has changed. I feel that security is no longer the same. The situation that Guatemala is going through. The conflict that has been increasing in recent years with these [00:41:00] fascist views as well, with the division between churches, for example, between fascist, radical Protestants, and neo-Pentecostal Protestants. And still, to some extent, the Presbyterian Evangelical Church, which is the one that tries to mediate between both and the Catholic Church.

All this, in addition to the fact that the east of Guatemala is classified as a high-trafficking area for drug trafficking, as well. So, all these political and geopolitical situations have been changing a lot the fact that you seek your own protection and that people also, when it is not a time of pilgrimage, do not tend to open their houses, but perhaps they open them more for when there is a little more influx, but it is already very little to see this type of dynamics.

The other thing is that many older people, let's say from the area, have already [00:42:00] passed away. And so there are still young people, including people who are no longer from Esquipulas, but who have migrated there for work reasons, so they are losing a sense of belonging, right? A sense of community. But if there is something I can rescue from a long time ago and that suddenly leaves us with the nice memory and the history that perhaps Jairo wants to talk about a little bit there, it is how certain commercial routes were woven between, for example, Oaxaca, Mixco and the people who took advantage of it to go to Esquipulas.

And also, how do we think about how consumer products have changed, because now, well, we see an invasion of plastic products, right? Coming from China, from these great pyramids of fraud and exploitation of labor in Malaysia, which also brings you Chinese products from there or from India, for example. We see the entry of a lot of this, [00:43:00] of this product, right?

So it is not like we can talk about this community, or about finding community networks in terms of the economy or production, because that is where you know that capitalism is voracious and globalization and all these factors that are happening right now are very cruel to the dynamics and ways of life of supporting each other, of loving each other, of pampering each other, and that it is intensifying more and more.

I think that the important thing is to name it so that if someone hadn't realized how the dynamics have been affected, well, now it can be seen, right? And sometimes it's also a bit selfish on my part, because you see, there we go to the fact that, since I only go there once, well, in the end it doesn't matter to me, like if I knit or not, right? It could be someone's thought, right? Well, I [00:44:00] only go once, I go to what I go to and I don't care if there's someone there who can support me, welcome me or whatever.

So, how do these dynamics, these frivolous thoughts, also because of the dynamics of life, of the economy and so on, intensify? So, well, that's what I could tell you.

Jairo: Yes, within How capitalism, the capitalist system , has also influenced these dynamics. I can specifically name during the last few times I have gone to Esquipulas, right from here in Mixco, how the economy has affected it, that is, the socioeconomic level also determines what you are going to do, right? Because many people who come from here, don't even think about staying, but rather they go at night, early in the morning, and they stay in [00:45:00] the bus or do they just go and make a pilgrimage , pray, leave their candles, don't pay for the hotel and return, right? That has happened on a couple of occasions.

Well, now there are lodging options, let's say of different types, which are usually reserved in advance . There is also this other situation, which also leaves aside a bit of what used to be done of preparing food , of bringing already hard-boiled eggs, as we call them, boiled eggs with tomato sauce, that is very much a travel thing in this context of Mixco, the travel tamales that they were also called, which is basically corn paste cooked with the husk, which is the husk of the corn. These tamales, well, served for that , to be able to reduce hunger while arriving at Esquipulas and now this has been little by little replaced just what Anny mentioned, by pre-prepared products, fried foods, which do not have any [00:46:00] sustenance , they do not even link with the memory of the kitchen, but technically it is something that is thrown away .

And of course, garbage also plays another important role, because we have little or no education regarding the environment and the companies that make us responsible for their packages, their little sachets, their bottles and all this , end up on the roads and, yes, it is a pilgrimage route, but there is also plastic garbage, right? Within that pilgrimage route.

And, well, naming also, this was a little bit of the cherry on the cake that I wanted to leave for this conversation, because, as the economic dynamics have affected trade and pilgrimage routes that may have existed for around 2 thousand years, right? You who live in Oaxaca, you can ask about the Black Christ of Esquipulas and you will find many people who are devoted to the Black Christ of Esquipulas [00:47:00] and they probably have a replica, well, in various places in Oaxaca . Especially the area, well, of the Isthmus, right? In the, in the Zapotec area as well, you will find many people who are devotees and a product of that, we already have it, well, anthropologically registered . It no longer occurs , but thanks to the grandmothers of my town this survives and it is like We, as Mixco, are in the middle of a trade route between basically, central Mexico and eastern Guatemala, which is over there .

So, Esquipulas is almost at a different point on this route, right?

Well, there is a memory of how our ancient people from Mixco interacted commercially with people who came from central Mexico. And this is evident in the use of the Mayan clothing of the Poqomam of Mixco, which is greatly influenced by the clothing that comes from the town [00:48:00] Zapotec, and the Mixtec people, in Oaxaca and as a result of that, I know it won't come out in the audio, but I'm going to describe it.

We have these sashes here, these sashes come from Santo Tomás Jalieza in Oaxaca . The famous sashes of Jalieza, which are used in Oaxaca and which were part of the ancient clothing of Mixco. This changed more or less in the mid- 60s .

There is memory, I heard from the mouths of many of the old ladies from here in my town that they said, the Mexicans came to sell us clothes, technically, but it is not the modern Tapachula route , now that it goes along the coast, but they refer to textiles. And we find photos of this, including photographs from the 19th century, from the end of the 19th century, beginning of the 20th century in which we see the use of these girdles, and we recognize them technically by this figure that surely, well, you will see it more represented in Oaxaca. [00:49:00] People here in Mixco call these "los bailadores" (dancers). In Oaxaca they have a name for them, specifically, I don't remember it, but it is thanks to this dancer that we recognize the sashes that come from that place because in Guatemala you can't find any other sash that is made of this material, because it is wool, or the weave on a backstrap loom with these designs can be quite thick.

So, thanks to Abisaí Navarro, who I hope can listen to this material, he is a friend who is from Oaxaca, who I met through social networks, who has basically dedicated himself to documenting the cultural expressions of Oaxaca and the spirituality of the Mixtec and Zapotec peoples. And he sent me these belts from Oaxaca. I mean, I can no longer say that I bought them from Oaxacan ladies. As a Mixqueño, I did not buy them from them because now they come by bus, the commercial dynamic has changed and also in Mixco the [00:50:00] Mayan clothing for daily use is no longer used. This is on the one hand, and on the other hand, we also have this other place called Yalalag, which is also Zapotec people, in which they use this garment on their head, they call it tlacoyales or buns, which consists of raw wool, dyed sheep, placed on the head, which is the emulation of a snake.

This, well, I didn't bring this from Oaxaca either, I got this thanks to a historian from Chichicastenango that Anny knows, María Jacinta Xón, her father dedicated a lot of time, and she has also dedicated herself, to the production of threads and the obtaining of silk, and her father who is now resting, well, was the one with whom we were able to investigate a little about where this wool came from. This wool is no longer produced even in Chichicastenango, in Anny's context, but [00:51:00] basically this is the last one that he had the opportunity to dye, but it is exactly the same wool that even he did not know its origin, undyed, where it came from.

And now this is not even achieved here in Guatemala, so it is evidence of how Mixco is in the middle of a trade route between basically the entire area of the Isthmus and the southern coast towards the east of Guatemala, which is another world that, if the Spanish invasion had not arrived and if there had not been this system that has somehow ladinized, as we say, or stripped the Mayan people of their identity. And, well, we would also have a great diversity of people in that territory. And well, it is a bit of the two garments that here in Mixco are still used by the women who participate in the brotherhoods, but it makes us think of the women of Oaxaca as well. It is very curious. I have a video that describes it, if you want you can see it there on my social networks, [00:52:00] I appear as "pacaya leaf" and there is a video where I talk about this tecoyal .

Anny: Yes , Chris, and something that I wanted to add to the conversation is the fact that, in the midst of this form of tourism that is often gentrifying and that also, like these dynamics of coming and going, everything around what happens in Esquipulas changes its dynamic.

It is true that now when you go to Esquipulas, there are suddenly hotels, maybe not chain hotels, but five-star hotels . People have tried to maintain hotels that are like family hotels . But that does not mean, for example, that there are more places for recreation, consumption, shopping and commercial exchange.

Because you know that in the end, the economic situation, I think that at a global level is not all that good for anyone, [00:53:00] Right? So, you always look for a way to get organized. from certain backgrounds. But, now that I think about it better, let's say in this conversation, I can see something very special .

For example, here in Guatemala, there are two more places where there is a pilgrimage to see the Black Christ, you don't have to go to Esquipulas and you can find it here, where I live, it's about an hour away, it's called Chinique de Las Flores. And then from Chinique de Las Flores, about three hours away, you can get to Cunén . Cunén, also here in K'iche', which are these, pilgrimage routes to go see also, replicas of the Black Christ of Esquipulas, but then I can tell you that we are finding what we once found in Esquipulas [00:54:00] more than 400 years ago, so to speak, 300 years ago.

So, we are finding it again there because, of course, these are areas that are still perhaps a little smaller, where the atmosphere is still more communal, where, well, it is still a village, as we call it, the essence of a village is still preserved. So it does not become a place to go and stay and spend a week there, or whatever, but rather it becomes a place to visit, to contemplate oneself, to go and make your pilgrimage, your prayer, your penance.

So, it seems to me that this is where, where a very, very rich essence can still be found.

Chris: Well, thanks to the energies, to the gods and deities that there are still places and people who honor those, those traditions and also as Jairo [00:55:00] mentioned, that well, the memory is also stuck within the textile, the weaving, I have also seen like a traditional chocolate drink here in Oaxaca that, according to some people, has its origin in the K'iche'. Although, it is said that that process, that recipe does not exist in the K'iche' now, but the memory still exists within those practices, right?

So the question of hypermobility and the sense of constant war in many ways in the contemporary world, how do you think that pilgrimage or the possibilities of pilgrimage can offer us a way, or ways, or paths to [00:56:00] undermine hypermobility, war, junk food as you mentioned, these economic dynamics and structures that are killing us little by little? What key can pilgrimage have in a world where we want to live?

Anny: Well, I think that the responsibility of each one of us is to carry messages of hope, I mean, there are always routes, right? There is the migratory route, there is the route of the monarch butterfly. There is that pilgrimage that they make, they come and go, and these pilgrimages that we also make as human beings, regardless of whether we are Christians or not, but there is always a route that you look for as a pilgrimage to heal your [00:57:00] pains, your illnesses, your traumas, your fears, whether you go on a pilgrimage to a mountain, a volcano, a hill, a church, a basilica, or wherever.

What is important to me, and what I find extremely hopeful, is that you also have that commitment to share a light with those you meet along the way. It may also be that your pilgrimage then does not start from the fact that, oh, I am going to think only about prayers, no, but rather, what can I also share along the way?

So I can also mention other routes, I think we have achieved this quite effectively when we think about migration routes and how we can lend a hand to our migrant comrades, right? So it seems to me that a very similar strategy could help a lot, to see this with different eyes and to see this, well, beyond, [00:58:00] I mean, we can always do several things, when suddenly we only have one goal, but in the end we can do a lot, so I think that as a message, that's what I would leave you with, so, in the end, in the middle of all this hyper mobility, let's take advantage of it, not only to burn elbows, but to leave other messages to people, right? About how we are also moving, mobilizing, what we are thinking and what is happening around the world.

Jairo: Yes, well, understanding that our dynamics have changed over time, that we are a generation that has seen abysmal changes within the dynamics of how we have related to other people, how we learn even because now, thanks to hyper mobility, also, including technology, we know new things, but not leaving aside the case, well, of people who go on pilgrimage, right? The [00:59:00] reflections that we made, why it is done, a little bit, and also what to do with ourselves when we go to a place and when we move, right?

The fact that I am really buying from people who are from there or am I going to open a supermarket, does this really benefit the community or does this benefit a company, because in the end it exploits people and buys the product from them super cheap and bargained for, right? I think that this dynamic of consuming what is from there has been maintained, at least in Esquipulas, the people, well, they make a great effort because they know that there are people from many contexts who come to that place, at least once a year. So, understanding these dynamics, I think it is a challenge also within our context and understanding that humans have always moved.

Thanks to the ancient people [01:00:00] who moved here 3 thousand years ago, we have this historical evidence and we also learn from these mobilities, how we generate a good impact when we are moving, I think.

Chris: We are learning and remembering at the same time, how to move with respect and gratitude and devotion to what gives us life. We are going to make sure that the images of those beautiful textiles will appear with the episode, on the El Fin del Turismo website. And also the names and contacts, if you want, of the compas that you mentioned, Jairo.

And so it's been like a great conversation, and it makes me want to continue with that [01:01:00] question of pilgrimage.

And on behalf of our listeners, I would like to offer my sincere thanks to both of you for joining us today, and for being willing to confront and wrestle with some of the contradictions and also the colonizations that have affected the act and the art of pilgrimage in our times.

If listeners are eager to learn more about what you do in life, is there a way to communicate or connect?

Anny: Yes, of course, on our personal networks, I am the current head curator of Espacio C, in Chichicastenango, so there you can find me on Instagram, or on Facebook, it is written [01:02:00] ESPACIO/C ARTE+MEMORIA. And then on my personal networks, in case anyone also wants to search. I am on Instagram as "Anny Puac," so you can find me also on Instagram so you can see, perhaps a little bit of my work, and then on our commercial networks as Los Cofrades Chichicastenango, that way you can find me, you can find us and now Jairo.

Jairo: Thank you. I have tried to create content that is not entirely commercial, but not so commercial. I have made reflections on these elements, from both sides, right? On spirituality in Guatemala in general, both Catholic and Mayan, and how this has a central point, it is a little bit what has been my [01:03:00] premise during the last few years, to show that not everything is strictly Catholic, Christian and that there are elements of Mayan spirituality that prevail, as we are talking about today.

You can find me as Hoja de Pacaya on social media. Pacaya leaves are used to decorate doors at parties here in the context of Guatemala. Pacaya is a palm tree. The flower is also eaten during trips, especially during pilgrimages. Pacaya flowers are wrapped in egg and tomato sauce is put on top, and it is very much a travel item. And in the Guatemalan context, pacaya leaves are used to refer to people who like parties and never miss a party.

So it's a bit of my user's premise, because yes, I like to document the festivals that take place in Guatemala with a background, perhaps of analysis [01:04:00] and reflection. And well, thank you for the space. I am very grateful for that, to both of you.

Chris: Again, thank you both so much for your time today, for your reflections and your commitments to the world, to life.

Anny: Nice to meet you too. And we are always in touch. I give you a big hug and I also give you a big hug to the land of Oaxaca.

Leave a comment

Subscribe now

S6 #2 | Narco Airbnb | Sofia y Carlos Montoya (Proyecto NN)

Chris Christou — Thu, 13 Mar 2025 15:09:45 GMT

En este episodio, mis entrevistados son Laura Sofía Montoya Gómez y Carlos Alberto Montoya Correa.

Carlos es arquitecto egresado de la Universidad Nacional sede Medellín. Experto en planificación, gestión y ejecución de proyectos de desarrollo urbano con énfasis en viviendas económicas en tratamientos de expansión urbana, consolidación, mejoramiento de barrios, renovación urbana y en zonas con restricciones geotécnicas. Ha participado como gestor en la ejecución de más de 50.000 viviendas económicas desde el sector público, en proyectos de cooperación internacional, de aplicación de políticas nacionales y de ejecución local en varias ciudades de Colombia (Bogotá, Medellín, Armenia, Bucaramanga, Rionegro y Bello). Ha sido docente en la Facultad de Arquitectura Universidad Nacional sede Medellín y ha participado de publicaciones colectivas de carácter técnico.

Sofia es arquitecta egresada de la Universidad Pontificia Bolivariana. Magíster en Arquitectura, Crítica y Proyecto de la misma institución donde actualmente también es docente en el área de Taller de Proyectos. Ha participado durante más de 13 años de varias colectividades en la ciudad de Medellín, donde ha podido desarrollar proyectos de investigación en el área del patrimonio urbano-arquitectónico que han sido publicados mediante recursos financiados a través de los estímulos de la Secretaría de Cultura Ciudadana. Es cofundadora de la Corporación Proyecto NN, organización sin ánimo de lucro que acompaña procesos comunitarios y promueve la educación y la dignificación de los espacios de encuentro populares.

Notas del Episodio

Que esta pasando en Medellin

El encaricimiento de la ciudad

El turismo sexual y el pueblo moralista

La gentrificacion de Pablo Escobar

La construccion y venta de vivienda paisa

Resentimiento y el dios dinero

Las mascaras del gobierno

“No se puede morir del exito”

El derecho a la ciudad y vivienda

Tarea

Proyecto NN - Sitio Web - Instagram

Transcripcion en Espanol (English Below)

Chris: [00:00:00] Bienvenida Sofía, bienvenido Carlos al podcast El Fin del Turismo. Muchas gracias por estar conmigo hoy para platicar de este tema, pues si, tan complejo. Me gustaría preguntarles en dónde se encuentran hoy y como se ve el mundo para cada uno de ustedes allá.

Sofia: Bueno, estamos aquí en la ciudad de Medellín. Estamos juntos en mi casa, Carlos es mi padre, y bueno, decidimos juntarnos para tener como una conversación más fluida, desde aquí, desde mi casa en el centro de la ciudad, que es un centro, pues además, bastante particular. Pues Medellín es una ciudad montañosa que queda en los Andes. Es un valle. Y digamos que el centro de la ciudad tiene, pues, unas dinámicas muy distintas a muchos centros de otras ciudades.

Carlos: Es una ciudad muy estrecha [00:01:00] y tiene en el costado oriental y occidental un par de montañas llenas de barrios. Aquí mismo por la ventana se ve toda las montañas urbanizadas y en el centro está, digamos la metrópoli, lo que pudiéramos llamar una ciudad más tradicional, mientras arriba son barriadas o comunas populares. Hoy en día, muy populares para cierto turismo.

¿ Y usted dónde está?

Chris: Pues yo llevando en Oaxaca, en la capital de Oaxaca, México también en un valle un poco mas amplio geográficamente que Medellín . Conozco Medellín porque andaba como turista hace 15 años quizás allá. Y pues empezando toda la [00:02:00] investigación para este episodio, encontre como muchos Entonces me gustaría leer unas citas de esos artículos para los oyentes que quizás no conocen Medellín, no saben qué está pasando allá, según los medios masivos.

Entonces, primero este, Nomad List. "Nomad List es una plataforma que publica su ranking de los destinos más populares para trabajar de forma remota. Colocó a Medellín en segundo lugar, el año pasado entre 157 ciudades de Latinoamérica."

El próximo dice que

"en la colonia de Manila de Medellín hay alquileres a corto plazo cuyos propietarios ganan más de cinco millones de pesos colombianos por mes o alrededor de $1,000 estadounidenses."

El próximo decía que

"aunque no se llevó [00:03:00] a cabo, el presidente local dijo en ese momento 'que prohibiría los alquileres a corto plazo en la ciudad como medida para prevenir el abuso y la explotacion sexual infantil. En esa búsqueda por encontrar una solución a ese flagelo, Guitierrez, el presidente local se reunió con representantes de la plataforma de Airbnb para llegar a un acuerdo.

Desde entonces se ha trabajado de común acuerdo con las partes en conjunto para evitar medidas extremas, pero si establecer acciones que permiten prevenir este delito en la ciudad"

Siguiendo, "en tanto, el número de apartmentos anunciados en Airbnb, la popular empresa de alquiler de propiedades vacacionales, subió de 8 mil en octubre de 2022 a 14 mil a [00:04:00] finales de 2023, según datos recabados por AirDNA."

Y finalmente, "los datos recientes dice que Medellín recibe 1.7 millones de visitantes extranjeros a una urbe de 2 millones y medio de habitantes."

Entonces, me gustaría empezar preguntándoles a ustedes dos sobre la gentrificación en Medellín. Yo encontré otro artículo sobre el tema. Y quizás se se exhibe, expone un poco de lo que está pasando allá y dice que

"Wilson y Felipe, ambos se reservaron sus nombres reales. Son dueños, cada uno, de un bar cafetería en Manila en El Poblado, una de las zonas más turísticas de mayor actividad económica. Los dos vecinos son de los pocos que quedan en su [00:05:00] cuadra, porque prácticamente todas las casas de la zona se transformaron en restaurantes, pequeños hoteles y hostales, escuelas de español o viviendas para alquileres cortas a través de aplicaciones como Airbnb, que toman los extranjeros y que en parte son la causa del sobrecosto en los precios de la vivienda para los habitantes tradicionales. Entre 2022 y 2023, los arriendos crecieron entre 50 y 100%.

Este barrio cambió demasiado, dice Wilson, era familiar y vea, se volvió tierra de viciosos y jíbaros que atiende a domicilio. Toda esa 'gentrificación' como le dicen, es a raíz de los inversionistas extranjeros y se encareció todo. Carlos, tú has trabajado para empresas estatales en Medellín y Bogotá, la Empresa de Desarrollo Urbano. y [00:06:00] sofia, tú has trabajado en el Proyecto NN ahí en Medellín. Entonces quizás podrían ofrecernos una idea de lo que ha sucedido en Medellín en los últimos años y las últimas décadas en términos de gentrificación y qué papel tiene que desempeñar el turismo y los turistas en ello.

Carlos: Pues yo, yo percibo esta situación como supremamente novedosa y reciente.

Vale decir que Medellín en los 90 era una ciudad a donde no venía nadie. Es decir, la situación de violencia urbana. Toda esta crisis que desató el narcotráfico en la ciudad nos tenía marginados del resto del mundo. Era una ciudad bastante poco atractiva por lo violenta y de inversiones relativamente paralizadas.[00:07:00]

Sofia: Fue la ciudad más violenta del mundo.

Carlos: Sí

Sofia: En cierto momento

Carlos: Y necesitó de una estrategia de atención entre la presidencia de la república y la alcaldía local que ustedes en México le llaman "presedencia local" para encontrar alternativos de futuro. Se llamaban los seminarios de muchas conversaciones.

Entonces, lo primero que quiero enseñar es que es un hecho muy nuevo, y muy reciente. Nosotros para ver un extranjero, era un futbolista que venían a los dos clubes. De resto aquí no venía a nadie. Ver rostros chinos o japoneses o alemanes eran, eso es muy sui géneris.

Y el paisa, la cultura antioqueña es una cultura supremamente hospitalaria.

La gente acá desborda de amabilidad. Es una cosa muy curiosa. El solo hecho de sentir a una persona de otra [00:08:00] región, no necesariamente extranjero, puede ser de otra región colombiana. El antioqueño desarrolla un, unas habilidades y unas formas de relación, muy amenas, muy atractivas. El antioqueño es una persona muy conversadora, muy dicharachero, y es muy abierto. Es muy tranquilo en las relaciones, diría eso en principio. Entonces sí, si sentimos, realmente se siente abrumadora la presencia de extranjeros, porque es notoria. Aquí mismo nosotros vivimos aquí. Yo vivo en un par de cuadritos donde los hoteles pequeños proliferan en dos cuadras han, se han desarrollado en los últimos tres años.

cinco, seis, siete hoteles, y la presencia del extranjero, es notoria. Y como le digo en un principio, era muy bienvenida, porque el extranjero, pues trae monedas con un [00:09:00] cambio muy fuerte y también aquí, el país es de una mentalidad comercial y negociante extrema. Aquí el negocio se ve pa vender un hueco, pues hacemos otro hueco.

Es decir, la gente aquí es supremamente ingeniosa en la forma de establecer negocios.

Sofia: Si, y, y creo que la ciudad hizo un esfuerzo institucional por cambiar también la narrativa. Pues porque, como lo dice Carlos, estuvo muy estigmatizada, pues somos la ciudad de Pablo Escobar. Cierto.

Eso es una carga como simbólica muy fuerte. Y entonces se ha hecho pues un un esfuerzo, por mostrar otras cosas que también somos. Creo que el reggaetón tiene mucho que ver como con la visibilidad de la ciudad también. Cierto, porque digamos que el reggaetón no solamente pues han salido grandes estrellas, grandes cantantes pues como de de aquí de Medellín, sino [00:10:00] que el reggaetón pues como muchas otras géneros musicales, pues como que en salsa o, o bueno enaltece, pues esas figuras como el narcotráfico de bueno, como cierta estética también. Y entonces es muy atractivo para muchos extranjeros venir a conocer la ciudad del reggaetón.

Y esa era una cosa que estaba pasando, digamos, de una manera más orgánica y más lenta antes de la pandemia. Con la pandemia se corta y luego de la pandemia, si se desbordó. O sea, ocurre como un fenómeno desbordado. También me imagino, pues como por esas ansias de mucha gente de viajar y de pues, de haber estado como paralizada en sus lugares, y la ciudad realmente no estaba preparada.

O sea, yo creo que todo ese esfuerzo institucional que se hizo, no se midió tampoco, como hasta, hasta dónde podía llegar, cierto? Porque, si bien es cierto que la ciudad es supremamente hospitalaria y acogedora, digamos que el clima es una de las cosas que también [00:11:00] a muchos extranjeros les llama la atención. Es un clima muy ideal, cierto? Un eterno verano. Pues, obviamente también hay unas estructuras, que ofrecen cosas. Hay mucha droga, hay mucha prostitución, cierto? Es una ciudad como también para un turismo que no deja tantas cosas buenas. Además, bueno, tú sabrás y tendrás del conocimiento, el turismo así no sea, pues, este turismo como de drogas y de prostitución y de fiesta desbordada. El turismo es un fenómeno que tiende como a arrasar, cierto? Es un fenómeno que encarece, entonces. Sí, creo que en en un principio, es una ciudad que un poco quería que esto sucediera, pero en este momento no sabe muy bien cómo manejar.

Carlos: Si también hubo un momento en que cuando la ciudad empezó a despegar, hubo cierto turismo académico, porque la ciudad empezó a ser muy sonora en cuanto a ciertas transformaciones [00:12:00] urbanísticas. Esta es una ciudad que tiene una empresa de servicios públicos muy poderosa.

Nosotros tenemos en Medellín, la alcaldía es la dueña de una especie de multinacional criolla que le vende servicios públicos y energía eléctrica. Le vende energía eléctrica a Panamá, a Ecuador y le brinda servicios públicos a unos 90 municipios en Colombia. Entonces, la ciudad tiene una capacidad de inversión social realmente notoria.

Y entonces la ciudad empezó a hacer eventos académicos para mostrar. Por ejemplo, Bogotá, que es la capital de Colombia, tiene 8,000,000 de habitantes. No ha podido construir un metro.

Chris: Wow.

Carlos: Y el metro de Medellín está cumpliendo 30 años. Lo que quería señalar es que se desarrolló una forma de turismo muy curiosa. Y es que aquí vienen extranjeros a visitar barrios populares, a meterse en [00:13:00] Moravia o en lo que aquí llamamos Comuna 13, en un hecho muy curioso por lo menos porque pues ir a un barrio popular donde, donde no hay servicios cómodos, donde no hay locaciones, donde pues, a ver como el espectáculo popular. No sé, es una cosa muy, muy curiosa y es increíblemente desbordado.

Es decir, hay lugares donde no cabe la gente físicamente y siguen yendo, o sea allá, son, todo eso es incómodo. Pero la gente sigue yendo, no se como a que, pero siguen llegando.

Sofia: Es una pregunta que nos hacemos constantemente, pues, de hecho, varios amigos siempre me dicen como, es que, a qué vienen? A qué vienen aquí?

Pues no entendemos a qué vienen, tal vez porque uno tiene naturalizado. No sé, pues todo lo que pasa aquí, pero uno sigue sin entender,

Carlos: Pero, diría, el turismo está asociado como a los centros de negocios, a los centros [00:14:00] históricos, a los centros culturales, pero que los barrios populares se volviesen un objetivo turístico.

Entonces, al principio, un turismo como institucional y académico. Aquí se hicieron eventos donde llegaron 2 mil estudiantes, de universidades de todo Colombia, de Ecuador, y de países vecinos, a ver lo que estaba pasando en Medellín. Pero de ese turismo muy institucional, académico de centros de estudio, de aulas, se transfirió, a un deseo de conocer los barrios populares y entonces el turista, el otro turista, perdóneme que hable así de, el que viene un poquitico maliciosamente a buscar como huellas del narcotráfico, o consumo, o redes de prostitución, se pega ahí y hay en estos momentos una acción entre Manila como sitio receptor de turismo y [00:15:00] Comuna 13, como sitio. Como Manila se controla, en ese acuerdo, en ese pacto entre empresarios del turismo y presidencia local, se hace unos pactos de control.

Entonces el turista ya no trae las niñas al barrio Manila, sino que van a buscarlos en la Comuna 13. O sea, pero sigue siendo el barrio popular un centro de atracción de turismo inusitado de unas escalas tremendas y hay una avidez, nos hago mucho realmente de qué pues realmente pero, pero está mezclado el turismo tradicional, el turismo popular y el turismo como académico si pudiéramos decir se entremezclan. Están ahí todos mezclados. Desbordando, desbordando la ciudad, encareciendo mucho. Se siente verdaderamente.

Sofia: Es que en este momento, Medellín es la ciudad más costosa de Colombia. O sea, por encima de Bogotá.

Chris: [00:16:00] Mm.

Sofia: Que eso nunca había pasado. Siempre, pues, para alguien de Medellín ir a Bogotá era más costoso.

Carlos: No, y un empleo, por ejemplo, mira, yo tuve el mismo cargo, se puede decir el mismo cargo, en Medellín y en Bogotá. Y por el solo hecho de estar en Bogotá, la asignación salarial, es más del doble. Entonces, Bogotá pues es la capital, eso mismo ha de pasar en todos los países del mundo. Pero yo mencioné que es una ciudad estrecha, tiene mucha posibilidad de crecimiento y de oferta habitacional. Al llegar este turismo, prácticamente copó todo el interés de los empresarios y ya, construir viviendas económicas aquí no le interesa nadie.

Chris: Y pues me gustaría llegar profundizando esa última noción o esta consecuencia del turismo, de la despojo, perdón en la ciudad, pero primero, me gustaría abrir un [00:17:00] poco de esos temas de la imagen de Medellín que quizás se da a los turistas extranjeros, como mencionaste Sofia, como mencionaste Carlos, de la prostitución y también el narcotráfico, una nota de la investigación que hice dice que recientemente el alcalde Guitierrez anunció que el ciere de 150 propiedades que en su mayoría están vinculados a la plataforma que habrían sido utilizadas para fines de turismo sexual y explotación de niños, niñas y adolescentes en la capital antioqueña. Ahora, en primer lugar, tiene a recapitular los imaginarios coloniales de violación o coerción. En segundo lugar, puede implicar a menores de edad. En tercer lugar, los servicios que prestan a las trabajadores sexuales en un lugar determinado pueden ocultar fácilmente la presencia de crimen [00:18:00] organizado, Dadas las complejidades y contradicciones presentes en el tema de turismo sexual, en un campo de trabajo en el que muchos están tratando de superar prejuicios y criminalizacion. ¿Cómo ven ustedes dos estos temas en en este momento?

Sofia: Pues a ver, lo primero que yo quisiera decir es que las redes de prostitución pues, o de trabajo sexual o de trata, pues, como de personas no iniciaron por la movida turística. O sea, esta ciudad siempre ha sido un lugar donde el trabajo sexual ha sido, como uno de los rubros de la economía, incluso, pues, en la época del narcotráfico. O sea, siempre ha sido así. Pues, como que las paisas tienen fama de ser mujeres bonitas. De bueno, tanto dinero que se ha movido en esta ciudad también, digamos que viene amarrado, pues como con ese tipo de actividades. [00:19:00] Entonces simplemente yo creo que el boom del turismo simplemente encuentra una estructura vieja que está que funciona muy bien. Es una estructura que ya existía. Lo mismo pues que lo de las drogas.

O sea, lo que pasa es que aquí las drogas, tal vez en los 90s, no se consumían tanto en la misma ciudad, porque todas se exportaban, pero la estructura está y pues simplemente el turismo se pega de esa estructura. Entonces, aquí la gente, pues es como también muy moralista y a todo el mundo le parece horrible que un gringo ande con una muchachita, pero esa muchachita ha andado con los mismos países de aquí toda la vida. Que les parece terrible, es que está sucediendo en los barrios tradicionalmente ricos de la ciudad. Y eso es lo que les molesta, porque prostitución, pues nosotros, que siempre hemos vive en el centro, siempre ha estado, siempre ha existido y esa dinámica no es nueva. Entonces, digamos que me parece que el paisa bueno, todo lo que hemos dicho, lindo del [00:20:00] paísa, pero también es muy moralista y se escandaliza, pues solamente cuando están al lado de su casa.

Carlos: Claro, pero además de que eran estructuras de negocios ilícitos asociados entre sí, es decir, narcotráfico y todas estas otras patologías sociales. A ello, el turismo, lo que hizo fue darle una manifestación inmobiliaria porque antes, claro, pero en los barrios ricos no.

Sofia: O muy, o muy puntualmente, pues, o muy, muy escondido.

Carlos: Muy escondido, cierto?

Pero, pero como se vio una fuente de negocio, como yo puedo arrendar y obtener, como dijiste, 2 mil doscientos dólares en arrendamientos, pues la visión de negocio y mercantilistas del paisa que la tiene por naturaleza, se embarca y entonces se asoció la droga y estos negocios, estas patologías sociales ilícitas a una versión [00:21:00] inmobiliaria.

Y ahí sí, la versión inmobiliaria tiene efectos en la economía de los arrendamientos, en la economía de varios de prestigio. Y entonces ya eso se vuelve

Sofia: Molesto.

Carlos: Una problemática de otra índole.

Sofia: Molesto y visible. Pero lo que yo quiero anotar es, por ejemplo, en la época los 90, en El Poblado, había fincas gigantes donde eran, pues como burdeles y pues los narcotraficantes iban allá y se encerraban, pero como estaba encerradito todo el mundo sabía que allí sucedían ese tipo de cosas. Llegaban, veían a las chicas llegar, o sea, como toda la dinámica, pero como sucedía ahí puntualmente. Pues, cierto, como en la época, no pasaba nada.

Carlos: En esa época, los narcos trajeron a todos los artistas importantes, de habla hispana. Todos los artistas, no quiero decir ningún nombre, algunos ya están difuntos, pero los artistas más importantes estuvieron haciendo shows en esas casas campestres donde [00:22:00] obviamente en el entretenimiento del narco, pues están desafortunadamente, las niñas bonitas paisas que

Sofia: Pero entonces, claro, esto era como puntualmente y era como una actividad que hacían los narcos, ya cuando sucede esto, pues es que ya es en tu mismo edificio, en el barrio que has habitado toda la vida.

Y entonces ahí, si se vuelve como muy abierto, como muy escandaloso, pues para esta sociedad que es como tan moralista. Yo, por ejemplo, no creo que eso sea una patología social. O sea, yo creo que pues finalmente, así como hay hombres que entregan su cuerpo y se vuelven sicarios y pueden sufrir, pues su cuerpo está expuesto a que les pase cosas horribles.

Pues hay mujeres que también encuentran en su cuerpo, pues una manera de sobrevivir y creo que, finalmente es una expresión como de la desigualdad, cierto?, y de la oportunidad. O sea, hay muchas mujeres y yo las conozco que que estudiaron una [00:23:00] carrera, o sea que no es que tengan tampoco necesidades, pues como vitales y deciden elegir ese camino porque es muy rentable, cierto?

Y esta es una ciudad que lo permite. Entonces, por ejemplo, no, no lo veo desde ese punto de vista tan moralista. Lo que sí es cierto es que precisamente por esa moral, como tan católica que tenemos todavía en esta ciudad, no hay mecanismo de control porque el único mecanismo de control es, decir que está mal, criminalizarlo y no se pasa de ahí, y no creo que pronto vayamos a pasar de ahí. Entonces, pues yo no veo, que eso, primero ni vaya a seguir sucediendo, creo que va a seguir sucediendo. Ni tampoco veo que haya como una actitud desde la institucionalidad más inteligente.

Carlos: Sí, las medidas del alcalde son más, más que todo anuncios para calmar el alboroto de la élite.

Sofia: Es que eso no tiene efecto.

Carlos: No tiene efecto de nada.

Chris: Gracias. Gracias, Sofía [00:24:00] y Carlos por sacar esas contradicciones que están ahí dentro de las dinámicas en Medellín. Pues más allá del turismo sexual y a veces junto con ello, es el turismo de drogas o narcos. Y un artículo de mi investigación dice que. Un comerciante en Medellin cuenta que algunos habitantes de La Comuna la promocionan como la "cuna" de Escobar para atraer más clientes.

Es más rentable, dice. Aquí compran camisetas de él, eh, ave María, todo lo alusivo a Pablo se vende mucho, dice el hombre que por seguridad, pide no ser citado. Y es que, pese a que la zona luce pacificada por el turismo, el control sigue en manos de los combos. El comerciante afirma que ahí operan bandas pequeñas [00:25:00] como Los del Uno, Los de Dos, Los Pirusos y Los Negros.

Ellos cobran cuota por negocio chuzo al aire libre y hasta parqueadero. Aquí no se abre un local sin su permiso. Y también pasa con los cuentos Airbnb que están empezando a abrir.

Ahora, una colega investigadora que trabaja junto a activistas en Colombia, me dijo hace un año aproximadamente que los carteles de narcotráfico en Medellin habían comenzado a utilizar Airbnb como una forma de lavar dinero.

Seguramente esto ha sido así desde hace mucho tiempo en el sector de inmobiliario normal, pero este simbolizaría una conexión directa, entre el crimen organizado, el turismo y la crisis de la vivienda. Entonces, ¿Qué piensan ustedes sobre la posibilidad de que los narcos, ya sea en [00:26:00] Medellin o la Ciudad de México, sean en secreto propietarios de Airbnb?

Sofia: Pues, bueno, frente a la primera pregunta o parte de la pregunta de lo de Pablo Escobar, pues es innegable, pues, que es una figura demasiado importante y no solamente, pues, como figura particular él, sino porque es un estereotipo de lo que somos. Yo no diría que los colombianos, pero no me siento pues como para hablar por todo el territorio nacional, pero si es un estereotipo de lo que es un paisa. Y por eso, pues muchas personas dirán horrible, no me quiero identificar con esta persona, pero así lo digan, pues tenemos mucho de él, pues así como él tiene mucho de nosotros, pues es que tenemos una cultura que es compartida.

Y finalmente, pues uno tiene tíos, amigos, pues que parece que tienen algunas, características de Pablo Escobar. Es un es un personaje pues que es muy cercano, para [00:27:00] nosotros.

Y así la ciudad intente, digamos, desde la élite, desde lo institucional, rechazarlo, es algo que es imposible, es imposible pues como negarlo.

Carlos: Sí, por ejemplo, en Comuna 13, parte del show o del evento turístico, es hacer muchas alusiones a la figura de Pablo Escobar. Entonces, está el tipo que tiene una fisionomía igualitica, como si fuera un actor, un doble y una serie de eventos cuando Escobar no tiene nada que ver ni con la violencia urbana que tuvo Comuna 13, pero es una forma en que la mentaría popular ve que explotar la figura de Escobar, pues es muy rentable para cierto turismo extranjero que todavía quiere circular versiones, relatos, que ya son [00:28:00] completamente míticos o legendarios porque son totalmente inventos, para traer clientes.

Sofia: Sí, y y además, uno se pone a pensar porque es que mucha gente se ofende. Osea, incluso pues me ha tocado presenciar momentos en que alguien se ofende porque un turista o un extranjero dice como "uy, yo vine porque es la ciudad de Pablo Escobar y me emociona y quiero una camiseta," cierto?

Pero es como, no sé si uno va y visita la ciudad de Al Capone. Pues es como lo mismo, simplemente es como un mito. Es una figura, cierto? Pues los criminales también han sido igual de atractivos que los personajes que son buenos, incluso, pues yo creería que los personajes malvados son los que son más atractivos.

Entonces, claro, aquí hay mucha, mucho resentimiento pues ante esa figura, pues porque todavía hay familiares de las víctimas, o sea, es una historia demasiado reciente, pero para el extranjero es simplemente una historia más, una historia de lo que ven en las películas. Y yo siento que muchas [00:29:00] personas que se, que se ven atraídas como por esa figura tienen como una noción del asunto muy infantil.

Pues creen que realmente es un personaje de una película, cierto? No entienden que realmente pues que esta ciudad explotó en bombas. No lo conciben y pues yo que no estoy tan adulta a mí me tocó. O sea, es una cosa que es demasiado reciente y todavía esta sociedad está muy traumatizada por eso.

Entonces, por eso es que hay tanto recelo, pero al mismo tiempo, es una oportunidad de negocio porque vende demasiado.

Carlos: Mira, nosotros vivimos aquí, pues en el centro de la ciudad y mi señora y yo, estaban ellos muy chiquitos. En la noche, contábamos las bombas, una, dos, siete, ocho, porque yo no sé si conoces la canción de La Noche De Chicago... de Mirta Castellanos.

Bueno, una canción que narra el enfrentamiento [00:30:00] de los gángsters en Estados Unidos contra la policía. Eso fue una masacre tremenda entre ambos bandos. Aquí vivimos eso, pero no era con ametralladoras, era con bombas. Pues, es decir, este tipo voló un edificio en Bogotá, el edificio del DAS.

Voló un avión de pasaderos civiles en el aire, o sea, un un personaje real. Y eso suena como fantástico, que eso no es realidad, pero eso es realidad. Esta ciudad estuvo marcada por escombros de todas esas detonaciones, además de que las masacres juveniles solo para crear caos. Pues estar un grupo de muchachos departiendo en en una discoteca y llegar grupos de sicarios solo por el solo hecho de que al otro día en las noticias, haya pavor en toda la ciudadanía porque se pensaba ganar esa guerra de esa manera.

Sofia: Terrorismo pues, [00:31:00] entonces, como cerrando un poco, pues para nosotros todavía es una historia dolorosa. Pero si uno también, como se pone en el papel de alguien que está en otro país y tiene otra realidad, pues claro que es una historia supremamente atractiva.

Y fuera de eso, puedes ir a la ciudad que fue la ciudad más peligrosa del mundo, pero ya sabes que no te va a pasar nada. Pues, okey, digamos, hay cierta seguridad, porque realmente aquí los turistas están cuidados y no están cuidados por la policía. Están cuidados porque las estructuras criminales, como ya lo dijiste, enlazando con la segunda parte, las estructuras criminales ya dieron la orden que a los turistas no les puede pasar nada porque están vinculados directamente a su negocio. Entonces es por esto que tenemos un gringo, pues que pena decirlo así, pero, así le decimos nosotros, un gringo, en un barrio popular y es más fácil que le pase algo a uno que es de la misma ciudad que a ellos. No les va a pasar nada, por qué? Porque son fuente de dinero y porque si los matan o si les pasa algo malo, van a dejar de venir.

Carlos: El negocio [00:32:00] se daña.

Sofia: Exactamente, es como, no sé si sabes pues, pero aquí a la, a los expendios de droga se les dice plazas. Y no hay lugar en la ciudad más seguro que una plaza, porque es que en una plaza a ti nadie te va a robar. porque pues está totalmente controlado y no le vas a dañar el negocio a los que tienen el negocio.

Entonces, obviamente es muy atractivo y aunque uno podría decir que gente tan boba o lo que sea o no entienden la historia, no están interesados en la historia, pues es que es una historia que realmente es muy atractiva. Pues porque aquí él contó un par de cosas, un par de titulares, pero todo lo que tiene que ver con los narcotraficantes de nuestra región es bastante fantástica.

Pues es, y por eso es que le han hecho series a Pablo Escobar, porque es que realmente es un personaje, pues muy interesante, muy interesante y con unas historias, pues que, que son cinematográficas. Entonces, como no se va a sentir el mundo atraído hacia eso.

Carlos: El tipo vivió una película en carne propia continua, pues [00:33:00] todo, la cárcel, las escapadas, los negocios que montó, la estrategia de llevar la coca en aviones.

Sofia: Y entonces asociado a lo que decías, pues que esta estrategia, pues como inmobiliaria o está de vínculo con los Airbnbs, pues claro a mí no me parece extraño, es que estas estructuras son supremamente inteligentes. Van adelante, claro. Y donde vaya mucho dinero siempre va a estar detrás pues, bueno, ¿Cómo lavamos dinero? Es que nos entra tanto dinero que tenemos que lavarlo. No lo vamos a lavar vendiendo empanadas. Vamos a lavarlo con algo que genere mucho dinero. Entonces, siempre, pues es que aquí han lavado plata con todo lo que uno se imagine y siempre han tenido casas, negocios, las farmacias, por ejemplo.

Carlos: Y y Chris, la actividad inmobiliaria. Ya cuando yo estudiaba, obviamente, yo tengo 68 años. O sea hace 35 años que estudiaba la zona de prestigio de El Poblado [00:34:00] era toda de casas campestres a las cuales se ingresaba por rieles, o sea.

Sofia: Por un camino de piedra.

Carlos: Si, sin una infraestructura urbana. Y en 30 años, el paisaje es lleno de torres, absolutamente lleno de torres, saturado. Lavado, aquí no hay una economía como para que mucha gente pudiente desarrollara no, no. Eso solamente se explica porque, pero era el negocio formal. Sí, y ese "negocio" entre comillas, no, no ocasionaba la molestia como ahora la, la gentrificación, antes , por el contrario, toda la élite valorizó sus fincas para en ella desarrollar torres, se llenaron de dinero, con dinero que era con seguridad absoluta en un porcentaje muy alto finanzas para lavar.

Sofia: De negocios ilícitos. Y el crecimiento de esta ciudad y sí, porque es un crecimiento demasiado [00:35:00] rápido. Pues a ti te, te debió haber tocado El Poblado ya totalmente lleno de torres pues. Pero lo que quiero decir es que acá no hay una economía tan grande como para que eso sucediera tan rápido. Entonces, pues es obvio, o sea, ahora nos parece como "uy podrían ser dueños de Airbnb." y yo diría, quién más? Quién más va a ser dueño en esta ciudad de ese negocio? Quiénes son capaces de comprar edificios enteros? O sea, quiénes tienen el dinero para invertir?

Carlos: Y para recuperarlo contra rentas cortas, es decir que me parece que es una inversión de mucho riesgo. Porque cualquier evento.

Sofia: Pues la misma pandemia.

Carlos: Lo lo puede tirar al suelo, cierto? Quién puede arriesgar eso? El narco.

Sofia: Es que mira que aquí tradicionalmente en la ciudad, acá les llamamos "panaderías paracas." Pues y son panaderías que venden el peor pan. O sea, nadie compra. Pero funcionan 24 horas.

Carlos: Y son super [00:36:00] lujosas, o sea lo que son muy bien establecidas.

Sofia: Y son negocios que nunca tienen clientes y venden un pan horrible y nadie les compra, pero siempre están ahí en las mejores esquinas.

Carlos: Abiertas todo el tiempo.

Sofia: Y además, tienen ligado como que eso lo inauguró Pablo Escobar, pues como un sistema de vigilancia. Entonces, en la época de Pablo escobar, eran los taxistas, cierto? Había como una red de taxis asociados y todavía creo que eso funciona. Pues y quiénes van a esas panaderías? Es decir, o sea, siempre siempre el narcotráfico, claro, tiene que tener negocios legales, pa poder, pues, si pa [00:37:00] poder.

Chris: Órale, pues qué fuerte y todo y supongo que debajo de todo, hay como más evidencia más capas de crimen organizado, no solo narcos, pero también el estado. Pienso como en una corporación de nivel mundial que se llama Blackstone, que ya ha pasado en lugares como Barcelona y otros ciudades en donde, [00:38:00] eh, se compran un edificio, se desplazan toda la gente, o sea, todos los residentes adentro y se convierte todo en Airbnb. O sea cada depa es un Airbnb ya, como 30, 50, 100, lo que sea, y se emplean, negocios tras negocios, tras negocios para, por ejemplo, los sistemas de organizar reservaciones, de la limpieza. Pero todos los trabajadores, todos los negocios no son parte de Blackstone. Son como empleado como freelance, no? Entonces ni hay ninguna cara vista en ese dinámica que está sacando, desplazando a la gente de sus edificios.

Sofia: No, yo iba a decir que de pronto aquí no, no, no es tan visible aún eso como de comprar edificios ya habitados, pero sí de construirlos. O sea, ya si se están [00:39:00] construyendo muchos edificios totalmente de Airbnb con inversiones extranjeras o locales, porque hay un personaje, pues aquí que que está como abanderado de ese tema y que dice que va, va a llenar todo Airbnb y que le parece bien.

Pues yo siento que está empezando a suceder. Está empezando a suceder.

Chris: Gracias, Sofía. Y pues, los efectos de turismo [00:40:00] excesivo, el sobreturismo y la gentrificacion en Medellin parece que han llegado muy rápido y fuerte. Sin embargo, los últimos años han surgido cuentas en las redes sociales criticando al turista, al nómada digital o al gringo, por lo que está sucediendo. ¿Es eso lo que ustedes todos también ven allá y están de acuerdo con la evaluación?

Sofia: Pues, a ver, resentimiento. Mm, no me parece que sea muy visible. O sea, me parece que hay como mucho escándalo, moralista. Pero pues, a a ver hubo como una pequeña marcha en el alrededor del Parque Lleras en contra pues del Airbnb, en contra de la explotación sexual infantil, pero no es muy masivo. O sea, ahí sí siento que culturalmente somos. O sea, aunque el paísa puede ser muy [00:41:00] beligerante como en sus palabras, como que parece muy bravo y furioso, realmente somos muy sumisos y sumisos ante el Dios Dinero. Entonces, mientras haya negocio, se acepta, se moverá, cierto? Y entonces, este efecto, pues como que de hecho, pues en en otras conversaciones hemos dicho bueno, yo no lo llamaría gentrificación.

Pues lo llamaríamos turistificación porque es una cosa que se está generando desde el turismo específicamente porque la gentrificación habla más desde un desplazamiento de un grupo social a otro, pero no necesariamente se refiere al turista. Y claro que hay un efecto porque en este momento hay una burbuja inmobiliaria.

Están muy costosos los arriendo en Medellín, el costo de la vida está altísimo. Y eso digamos que aunque se concentra en el sur, en El Poblado y en Laureles, pues en el occidente, eso tiene una onda expansiva, pues que afecta como el resto de la ciudad y realmente los arriendos se han encarecido, digamos de lo más costoso a lo que era pues como más barato. Y si nos afecta a todos, [00:42:00] pero yo no veo a nadie ni organizándose, no?

Carlos: Ni siquiera la relación que estableciste en una pregunta anterior con la oferta de vivienda. Porque, digamos una cosa es que algunos edificios obsoletos o que se desarrollen nuevos edificaciones para atender turistas, pero supuestamente la oferta de vivienda tradicional de la ciudad debería continuar, pero no ha sido así.

O sea, la situación se ha agravado porque ya te mencioné. Esta es una ciudad muy estrecha y es una ciudad que no tiene suelo de expansión. No tiene para dónde crecer. Entonces, cuando este tema llega al tema inmobiliario, uno pensaba que iba a haber una reacción, no necesariamente resentimiento, sino una reacción social.

Sofia: Por lo menos de exigencia pues ante las autoridades, pues, que tomen conciencia en el asunto.

Carlos: O institucionales, o de los gremios, pero no. Porque finalmente hay [00:43:00] negocio y el negocio opaca todo en la cultura y en la mentalidad nuestra. Yo creo que, que todavía una respuesta ante la crisis, yo creo que la crisis va a seguir acentuándose. Va a seguir manifestandose y acentuándose, y que una reacción o una respuesta empresarial, institucional.

Sofia: O ciudadana...

Carlos: Exactamente, todavía no, se ve muy clara.

Sofia: Sí, porque si uno, si puede decir bueno, "hay gente que no le gustan los turistas," pero no es una cosa generalizada, porque de nuevo, si hay como un espíritu como hospitalario o si el turista te trata bien a ti, porque lo vas a tratar mal. O sea, yo no he visto, pues, que en un negocio alguien vaya a tratar mal a un turista que no le quiera vender.

No, eso no sucede. Pues, entonces no creo que esté sucediendo algo así. Pues, creo que, la situación, digamos, económica y social, estaba muy densa, pues está como muy [00:44:00] fuerte aquí en la ciudad y la gente simplemente está intentando sobrevivir.

Carlos: Y digamos, el malestar que se presentó en Manila y sus alrededores es porque ciertos eventos de drogadiccion y prostitución era muy visibles. Cuando se logra el pacto de ocultar, pues todos tranquilos, porque la gente aquí es muy mojigata. Esto es una una sociedad simplemente conservadora, "católica" entre comillas y con que la cosa no se vea, pues está bien.

Sofia: Yo también quería anotar que, que claro que han habido como unas pequeñas manifestaciones en El Poblado, cierto?, de residentes que se han visto afectados. Pero eso no tiene eco en toda la ciudad porque es que eso finalmente gente rica que está molesta porque ya no puede vivir en el arrendamiento, en el barrio que vivió toda la vida, sino que le toca desplazarse a otro menos cómodo.

Pero no es como que se vayan a quedar sin posibilidad de vivir en la ciudad, por ejemplo. Me parece que no es como algo tan crítico. Y eso no va a tener eco en la [00:45:00] ciudad porque un montón de niños ricos se quedaron sin poder pagar su apartamento, pues, o el apartamento que quieren o en el barrio que quieren.

Simplemente claro está desplazando un poco, entonces hay nuevas zonas. Eso si se llama gentrificación, estos barrios más tradicionales, más populares están siendo ocupados por estas personas de clase alta de nuestra ciudad que han sido desplazadas por la gente de clase alta del mundo, cierto?

Y entonces esta gente que habitaba en esos barrios tradicionales, pues le toca coger para la ladera, cierto? Para los barrios populares. Y bueno, y digamos que esa es la incomodidad. Pero yo no siento que sea algo generalizado.

O sin mucha fuerza, o por lo menos no con una llamada clara a la [00:46:00] acción.

Chris: Vale, vale, pues muchas gracias, Sofía, Carlos. Entonces, si no hay tanta resistencia en las calles, me gustaría preguntarles de las acciones del gobierno de Medellin. Entonces, en mi investigación para el episodio, yo leí algunos artículos que ofrecen los siguientes datos:

Ahora, "Medellin tiene un déficit de más de 50,000 viviendas según Viva, según la empresa de vivienda de la gobernación de Antioquia."

Ahora, "Juan Camilo Vargas, director de Asohost, el [00:47:00] gremio de esta actividad en Colombia dice que el 40% de sus operaciones se concentra en Medellín y que el negocio no es ilegal. Entonces un alcalde no puede pasar por encima de una norma nacional."

Ahora "Y aunque no ha tomado medidas concretas, el alcalde Gutiérrez también ha enviado señales de posibles restricciones para el negocio de los hospedajes cortos. En la ciudad más de 1700 lugares operan sin licencia según el sistema de información turística."

Y finalmente "No vamos a acabar con las plataformas, pero si habrá regulaciones, dijo el mandatorio ante el consejo el 4 de marzo." Dice "No puede ser que en tres años hayan aumentado tanto los arriendos [00:48:00] o que la vida de nuestras familias se vuelve imposible por las rentas cortas."

Entonces, pues el gobierno local habla de adoptar una postura dura contra el tráfico sexual relacionado con el turismo y la crisis de vivienda. Y dadas las fallas en Barcelona para enfrentar las consecuencias del turismo, incluso después de que su alcalde fue elegido por hacer exactamente eso, ¿Qué esperanza cree que existe a nivel gubernamental en Medellin?

Sofia: No, claro esto una, pues, qué pena decirlo. Pero Chris, es que nosotros tenemos un alcalde que se cree Batman. Pues que anda en un helicóptero diciendo que va a perseguir el mismo a los ladrones, pero es toda una fachada y digamos que nuestra sociedad compra eso. Pero pues se cerraron tres apartamentos, tres edificios, o sea, se cerraron unos cuantos negocios.

Eso sale en la primera plana. [00:49:00] Pero pues yo, yo tengo gente cercana que ha invertido en Airbnb. Y no han tenido ningún problema. No les han hecho ningún requerimiento. Nunca les han visitado la policía. Claro, creo que depende mucho como del administrador de la propiedad, no admitir lo que se supone que en la plataforma no está admitido, cierto? Que tengamos esta persona cercana que que está, pues como inversionista de un Airbnb, si dice nosotros no admitimos nada de eso. Y las veces que hemos tenido intentos de que alguien entre a alguien, se llama la policía, y claramente de una se expulsa a la persona. Bueno, digamos que si hay un procedimiento, pero ni siquiera a esa persona, la policía se lo va a llevar.

O sea, a mí me ocurrió una cosa una vez, y es que yo estaba en una portería de una unidad en El Poblado y entró un extranjero con dos niños pequeños, con dos niños de 10 años. Y yo pensé que eran [00:50:00] sus hijos, pues como yo pensé que eran sus sus hijos adoptivos pues, pues, como que, bueno, simplemente yo vi a entrar un un hombre con dos niños, pero sí me llamó la atención como estaban vestidos los niños.

Y le pregunté el portero, como esos son los, pues como que estaba confundida si me llamó la atención en la manera en que estaban vestidos. Y el portero me dijo no es que estos gringos vienen a hacer eso en ese apartamento y yo, pero ¿Por qué no estamos llamando a la policía? Y él me decía "es que los tienen que coger con las manos en la masa."

O sea, no hay, un procedimiento tampoco para hacerle frente a esto. Y es una cosa que muchas veces sucede, pero no hay herramientas institucionales para que deje de suceder porque finalmente ellos están protegidos porque están en el interior de un apartamento, porque el dueño del apartamento está de acuerdo. Bueno, digamos que es toda una cadena.

Entonces realmente es difícil del desuno de vista legal. lo que creo es que nuestro alcalde y muchos otros que hemos tenido son maravillosos haciendo anuncios, [00:51:00] cierto? Siendo portadas de periódico.

Carlos: Aunque, aunque hay anuncios en el aeropuerto ahí, pues tú te bajas de un vuelo internacional y en el pasillo vas a encontrar...

Sofia: Si, que que no, que no se admite esto, pero igual siempre vas a poder acceder a ello.

O sea claro, y son muy buenos haciendo anuncios, así como han hecho anuncios de muchas cosas. Pues como se va a acabar la criminalidad, o sea, van a pasar muchas cosas, pero en el cotidiano, pues uno ve que eso no es cierto. O sea, uno se va para el Lleras y uno sigue viendo pues, toda la dinámica cierto?. Qué era muy escandaloso, Chris, y que creo que ya dejó de pasar, que es que uno se iba para el para el Lleras. Pues que no sé si estás ubicado en El Poblado, como en el mejor dicho, es como el centro del turismo, en el barrio de El Poblado, y uno veía niñas indígenas que bailaban por monedas, cierto?. Y era como, ya ni siquiera era [00:52:00] necesariamente, es que ellas fueran prostitutas, sino no que estaban, digamos, haciendo algo que la gente consideraba muy indigno y que eran niñas y que eran indígenas.

Al lado de todas las, cierto? Trabajadores sexuales que se estaban, digamos, ofreciendo sus servicios. Y eso fue lo que más, alarmó a la gente, como, porque tenemos estas niñas indígenas, y entonces, bueno, la actitud fue, se van de aquí, ya no pueden estar, le quitamos las niñas a los papás. Bueno, un montón de acciones que uno sabe desde adentro que no van a tener absolutamente ningún efecto y que es posible que esas niñas la vayan a pasar todavía peor de lo que ya la pasan, cierto?, bueno, como que yo la verdad no creo que vayan a cerrar Airbnb. No creo que vayan a prohibir el Airbnb en Medellín.

Carlos: Pues yo veo muchas construcciones para adelante. Y tengo compañeros o amigos ex alumnos arquitectos que dicen que los negocios que les están entrando es diseñar y construir [00:53:00] Airbnb.

Sofia: Si. Y fuera de eso, pues, porque es que esos anuncios son muy fáciles de decir. Pues incluso yo he visto que en otras ciudades han empezado a regular. Que hay zonas de la ciudad que no se admiten los Airbnbs o que, digamos tienen un tiempo, mínimo, o sea que son 30 días mínimo, entonces son estancias cortas, pero de un mínimo, o sea, no es, voy a pasar el fin de semana en Medellín y me voy a des cualquiera, sino vengo a trabajar. Pero eso ni siquiera ha sucedido.

O sea, no hay una mínima regulación, entonces, pareciera de pronto, si se leen los titulares pareciera pero hasta ahora no ha pasado nada concreto.

Carlos: Y hay muchos enterramientos, por ejemplo, de que el presidente local, fue financiado por todo este sector inmobiliario y pongámosle raya, relacionado con el turismo. Entonces él, él no tiene capacidad moral de controlarlos.

Chris: Pues justo me encontré una cita del arquitecto Joseph Bohigas, [00:54:00] y el dice que "en la segunda ciudad de Colombia, aún hay tiempo para evitar las imágenes que se repiten hoy en Barcelona," que "Medellín no puede morir de éxito."

Carlos: Pues él nos lanzó esa frase porque acordáte que te mencioné que hubo un turismo académico muy fuerte y una, pues pretendía cierta hermandad entre Medellín y Barcelona. Pues eso no tiene nada de hermanos, pero la academia va para todo. Entonces, toda esta oleada de arquitectos y urbanistas de Barcelona estuvieron aquí, asesorando a las alcaldías, a los gobernadores durante unos 10 años seguidos.

Todos los arquitectos importantes de Barcelona tuvieron aquí y el vino. Y él nos dijo esa frase por ahí en el 2007. Estaba en alcaldía terminando Fajardo cuando el dijo ojo que una ciudad puede morir del éxito. Entonces desarrolle la idea y [00:55:00] más o menos decía pues la gentrificación, el encarecimiento, la turistificacion fueron cosas que no, que él anunció.

Claro, esta es una ciudad sin mar. La gente viene a montañas y la vegetación. Tú sales de Medellín a dos horas y estás como en una selva. No es una selva, es un bosque tropical tremendo, muy atractivo. Yo creo que ese es un atractivo que la ciudad también ayuda a traer mucha gente, es decir, Santa Fe, Antioquia, Guatape, Jardín, son municipios relativamente cercanos, muy, muy atractivos para el que viene realmente a descansar, cierto? Entonces yo creo que esto podría ser una oportunidad. Esta situación de gentrificación, turistificación, encarecimiento, actividad inmobiliaria, que de, que está abandonando la vivienda, digamos para el, para el residente. Podría ser la oportunidad para que ese morir del éxito pudiera ser confrontado [00:56:00] mediante políticas.

A eso requiere mucho liderazgo de la alcaldía, mucho. Actualmente yo no veo la alcaldía con comprensión estratégica de lo que puede estar pasando y de cómo esto pueda grabarse mucho.

Sofia: Sí, sí, gracias, Carlos. Para terminar nuestra conversación, me gustaría preguntarte Sofía sobre el proyecto que nos pusimos en contacto. El Proyecto NN, me encantaría que pudieras explicarnos qué es el Proyecto NN y qué hacen ustedes ahí en Medellin?

El Proyecto NN es una corporación sin ánimo de lucro, pues que está interesada por apoyar procesos como de organizaciones culturales o sociales, digamos en zonas periférica de la ciudad, aunque también hemos trabajado o nos interesa mucho también la parte, digamos pedagógica o la parte de [00:57:00] formación en temas relacionados con patrimonio, con urbanismo, cierto? Como con, cultura en general.

Sofia: Somos varios arquitectos que hacemos parte, pues de la organización y todos somos profesores universitarios. Entonces, bueno, tenemos como ese interés por la pedagogía y digamos que ese cruce de la pedagogía y la dignidad espacial, y el interés por los espacios de encuentro, digamos comunitarios, pues nos ha llevado apoyar estos procesos, a encontrar mecanismos o idear proyectos para dignificar esos espacios donde la gente se encuentra, donde la gente se encuentra generalmente a compartir, pero también a aprender y a buscar como salidas para gestionar la propia vida, cierto?, digamos, para superar esa desigualdad que muchas veces también tiene que ver con la desigualdad en la oferta de oportunidades, precisamente, incluso desde la, desde la educación.

Y pues, porque, aunque supuestamente en Colombia, la educación es un derecho, pues realmente no se [00:58:00] cumple cierto?. Y vinculado un poquito como a esta idea de la vivienda, pues también se supone que en Colombia, la vivienda digna es un derecho, y eso es algo que vemos que no se cumple.

Y, pues, ahorita mencionábamos un poquito como la conformación de la ciudad, y podemos decir que, pues esos lugares en donde la vivienda digna no se cumple, pues se da sobre todo en las laderas, cierto? En la parte alta de la montaña. Y es allí donde estamos trabajando, donde vemos precisamente que hay un tipo de urbanización, pues como muy precaria, donde los servicios básicos no están cubiertos y donde un espacio comunitario, pues cubre realmente muchas de las necesidades de las personas, cierto?

Incluso, pues , como espacio de socialización, cierto? Como espacio de encontrar pares, cierto? Para enfrentar, pues, esa situación. Entonces, bueno, eso es lo que hacemos desde el Proyecto NN y bueno, y digamos que intentamos [00:59:00] reflexionar teóricamente, pues, este asunto del derecho de la ciudad y el derecho de la vivienda, pero también estamos intentando, pues, como adelantar proyectos que tengan que ver transversalmente con este asunto.

Ahora en compañía de Carlos, pues que Carlos ahorita les, te contará un poco. Pero Carlos, pues es un experto en mejoramiento integral de barrios, bueno, en todas estas intervenciones que se puedan hacer en estos, en estos lugares de la ciudad, estamos, liderando un proceso de formación, pero también un proceso constructivo, si puedes llamarse así, de prevención de riesgos y desastres.

Pues, porque en estos barrios el derecho a la ciudad es eso cierto? Esta gente bueno, viven unas condiciones precarias, pero además, están arriesgando sus vidas, cierto?, porque, no tienen las condiciones urbanas, pues, para que su vivienda sea una vivienda segura.

Y entonces estamos encontrando y a [01:00:00] mecanismos, pues, para transmitir algunos conocimientos técnicos y pues, para mejorar esas condiciones de vida. Entonces, digamos que, pues para nosotros el derecho a la ciudad tiene que ver también con esto, cierto? De, bueno, el estado no lo puede resolver. Pero entonces, como comunitariamente encontramos alternativas para mejorar estas condiciones.

Carlos: Yo agregaría que para mí, por lo menos en la experiencia profesional que he tenido, literalmente el derecho de la ciudad es derecho a la vivienda. Yo no concibo ni siquiera la ciudad sin oferta de vivienda, sin vivienda. La ciudad es un lugar para vivir fundamentalmente y dentro de estas estrategias de gestionar la vivienda.

Pues, pues, vos, sabes, Chris que Colombia y Medellín es una ciudad muy, muy determinada por por el desplazamiento desde las regiones. Es una ciudad que recibe población migrante expulsada por fenómenos [01:01:00] violentos, por buscar oportunidades, por la misma atractividad de la ciudad, porque es una ciudad que se mueve, que mueve la economía.

Entonces, precisamente el sector inmobiliario, digamos entretenido con Airbnb, la alcaldía que no sabe para donde mirar y la gente llegando desde las regiones expulsada de muchas formas, se ubica en unas laderas muy, muy inhóspitas, de muy difícil adiestramiento, de muy difícil urbanización. Entonces vemos que allí, desde la formación, desde la capacitación, desde la pedagogía, de, pero siempre llevando a la práctica con la red de monitoreo de puntos críticos en un barrio, con la identificación del que es un punto crítico, con los factores de riesgo del barrio.

Estamos tejiendo con ellos y el lugar de reunión, la sede de Somos Por [01:02:00] Naturaleza y el Proyecto NN, ahí nos encontramos construyendo con la gente conocimiento, oportunidades, posibilidades. En eso estamos.

Chris: Orale, pues suena un proyecto increíble, necesario y muy hermoso. Entonces, gracias a ustedes dos y también en el nombre de nuestros oyentes, me gustaría agradecerles a ambos por estar dispuestos a hablar conmigo sobre estos temas hoy. Igual fue muy revelador para mí y espero que poco a poco se sigan construyendo la derecha a la ciudad, a la vivienda, y la solidaridad, con la gente ahí en Medellin. Entonces, ¿Cómo podrían nuestros oyentes seguir a sus trabajos, compañeros?

Sofia: Ah, bueno, nos pueden seguir en en Instagram, @ProyectoNN. Ahí intentamos compartir, pues, como parte del proceso de los proyectos [01:03:00] que que tenemos en curso y bueno, próximamente también vamos a actualizar la página www.proyectonn.com

Y bueno, por ahí pueden ver como, como las cosas que estamos haciendo y adelantando. Y pues también, muchas gracias a ti por la invitación.

Siempre son temas muy bacanos como de conversar, reflexionar, chévere.

Carlos: Así que a la gente de Oaxaca y a usted Chris que se interesaron en estas conversaciones, pues muchas gracias.

Chris: Gracias, Sofía. Gracias Carlos. Bonito día.

Leave a comment

Subscribe now

English Transcription

Chris: [00:00:00] Welcome Sofia, welcome Carlos to the podcast The End of Tourism. Thank you very much for being with me today to talk about this very complex topic. I would like to ask you where you are today and what the world looks like for each of you there.

Sofia: Well, we are here in the city of Medellin. We are together in my house, Carlos is my father, and well, we decided to get together to have a more fluid conversation, from here, from my house in the center of the city, which is a very particular center. Well, Medellin is a mountainous city that is in the Andes. It is a valley. And let's say that the center of the city has, well, very different dynamics to many centers of other cities.

Carlos: It is a very narrow city [00:01:00] and on the eastern and western sides there are a couple of mountains full of neighborhoods. Right here, through the window, you can see all the urbanized mountains and in the center is, let's say, the metropolis, what we could call a more traditional city, while up there are neighborhoods or popular communes. Nowadays, they are very popular for certain types of tourism.

And where are you?

Chris: Well, I was in Oaxaca, the capital of Oaxaca, Mexico, also in a valley that is a bit larger geographically than Medellín. I know Medellín because I was there as a tourist maybe 15 years ago. And so, starting all the [00:02:00] research for this episode, I found how many... So I would like to read some quotes from those articles for the listeners who may not know Medellín, don't know what's going on there, according to the mass media.

So, first up is Nomad List. "Nomad List is a platform that publishes its ranking of the most popular destinations for working remotely. It placed Medellin in second place last year out of 157 cities in Latin America."

The next one says that

"In the Manila neighborhood of Medellin, there are short-term rentals whose owners earn more than five million Colombian pesos per month or about $1,000 US."

The next one said that

"Although it was not carried out [00:03:00] , the local president said at the time 'that he would ban short-term rentals in the city as a measure to prevent child sexual abuse and exploitation. In that search to find a solution to this scourge, Guitierrez, the local president, met with representatives of the Airbnb platform to reach an agreement.

Since then, the parties have worked together in agreement to avoid extreme measures, but to establish actions that allow preventing this crime in the city."

Continuing, "Meanwhile, the number of apartments listed on Airbnb, the popular vacation rental company, rose from 8,000 in October 2022 to 14,000 at [00:04:00] the end of 2023, according to data collected by AirDNA."

And finally, "recent data says that Medellín receives 1.7 million foreign visitors to a city of 2.5 million inhabitants."

So, I'd like to start by asking you two about gentrification in Medellin. I found another article on the subject. And maybe if you show it, it exposes a little bit of what's going on there and says that

"Wilson and Felipe, both of whom withheld their real names, each own a café-bar in Manila in El Poblado, one of the most touristic areas with the greatest economic activity. The two neighbors are among the few left on their [00:05:00] block, because practically all the houses in the area have been transformed into restaurants, small hotels and hostels, Spanish schools, or short-term rentals through apps like Airbnb, which are taken over by foreigners and are partly the cause of the high cost of housing for traditional residents. Between 2022 and 2023, rents grew between 50 and 100%.

This neighborhood has changed a lot, says Wilson. It was a family-oriented neighborhood, and you see, it became a land of drug addicts and drug dealers who provide home delivery. All this 'gentrification', as they say, is due to foreign investors and everything became more expensive. Carlos, you have worked for state-owned companies in Medellín and Bogotá, the Urban Development Company. And [00:06:00] Sofia, you have worked on the NN Project there in Medellín. So perhaps you could give us an idea of what has happened in Medellín in recent years and decades in terms of gentrification and what role tourism and tourists have to play in it.

Carlos: Well, I perceive this situation as extremely new and recent.

It is worth saying that Medellin in the 90s was a city where nobody came. That is to say, the situation of urban violence. All this crisis that drug trafficking unleashed in the city had us marginalized from the rest of the world. It was a rather unattractive city due to its violence and relatively paralyzed investments. [00:07:00]

Sofia: It was the most violent city in the world.

Carlos: Yes

Sofia: At some point

Carlos: And it required a strategy of attention between the presidency of the republic and the local mayor's office, which you in Mexico call "local presidency" to find alternatives for the future. They were called the seminars of many conversations.

So, the first thing I want to show is that it is a very new and recent fact. For us, to see a foreigner, it was a footballer who came to the two clubs. Otherwise, nobody came here. Seeing Chinese or Japanese or German faces was very unique.

And the paisa, the Antioquian culture is a supremely hospitable culture.

People here are overflowing with kindness. It's a very curious thing. The mere fact of feeling a person from another [00:08:00] region, not necessarily a foreigner, can be from another Colombian region. The Antioquian develops skills and ways of relating, very pleasant, very attractive. The Antioquian is a very talkative person, very talkative, and is very open. He is very calm in relationships, I would say that at first. So yes, we do feel, the presence of foreigners really feels overwhelming, because it is noticeable. We live here. I live in a couple of small blocks where small hotels have proliferated in two blocks, they have been developed in the last three years.

Five, six, seven hotels, and the presence of foreigners is noticeable. And as I said at the beginning, it was very welcome, because foreigners bring coins with a very high exchange rate and here, the country has an extremely commercial and business mentality. Here, the business is seen to be selling a space, so we make another space.

I mean, people here are extremely resourceful in the way they do business.

Sofia: Yes, and I think the city made an institutional effort to change the narrative as well. Because, as Carlos says, it was very stigmatized, because we are the city of Pablo Escobar. True.

That is a very strong symbolic burden. And so an effort has been made to show other things that we are as well. I think that reggaeton has a lot to do with the visibility of the city as well. True, because let's say that reggaeton has not only produced great stars, great singers, like from here in Medellin, but [00:10:00] that reggaeton, like many other musical genres, like in salsa or, well, it exalts, well, those figures like drug trafficking, well, like a certain aesthetic as well. And so it is very attractive for many foreigners to come and get to know the city of reggaeton.

And that was something that was happening, let's say, in a more organic and slower way before the pandemic. With the pandemic, it was cut off and after the pandemic, it overflowed. In other words, it happens as an overflow phenomenon. I also imagine, well, because of the desire of many people to travel and, well, to have been paralyzed in their places, and the city really wasn't prepared.

I mean, I think that all that institutional effort that was made was not measured either, as to how far it could go, right? Because, although it is true that the city is extremely hospitable and welcoming, let's say that the climate is one of the things that also [00:11:00] attracts the attention of many foreigners. It is a very ideal climate, right? An eternal summer. Well, obviously there are also some structures that offer things. There are a lot of drugs, there is a lot of prostitution, right? It is a city that is also for a tourism that does not leave many good things. Also, well, you will know and you will have the knowledge, tourism even if it is not, well, this tourism of drugs and prostitution and unbridled partying. Tourism is a phenomenon that tends to be devastating, right? It is a phenomenon that makes it more expensive, then. Yes, I think that at first, it is a city that kind of wanted this to happen, but at this moment it does not know very well how to handle it.

Carlos: Yes, there was also a time when the city began to take off, there was some academic tourism, because the city began to be very loud in terms of certain urban transformations [00:12:00] . This is a city that has a very powerful public services company.

In Medellin, the mayor's office is the owner of a kind of local multinational that sells public services and electricity. It sells electricity to Panama and Ecuador and provides public services to some 90 municipalities in Colombia. So, the city has a really notable capacity for social investment.

And then the city started to hold academic events to show off. For example, Bogota, which is the capital of Colombia, has 8,000,000 inhabitants. It has not been able to build a subway.

Chris: Wow.

Carlos: And the Medellin metro is celebrating its 30th anniversary. What I wanted to point out is that a very curious form of tourism has developed. And that is that foreigners come here to visit popular neighborhoods, to get into [00:13:00] Moravia, or what we call Comuna 13 here, is a very curious fact, at least because you go to a popular neighborhood where there are no comfortable services, where there are no venues, where you can see the popular show. I don't know, it's a very, very curious thing and it's incredibly overwhelming.

That is to say, there are places where there is no room for people physically and they keep going, that is, there, they are, all of that is uncomfortable. But people keep going , I don't know why, but they keep coming.

Sofia: It's a question we ask ourselves constantly, in fact, several friends always ask me, like, what are you here for? Why do you come here?

Well, we don't understand what they're coming for, maybe because one has become naturalized. I don't know, well, everything that happens here, but one still doesn't understand,

Carlos: But, I would say, tourism is associated with business centers, historical centers , cultural centers, but popular neighborhoods become a tourist destination.

So, at the beginning, it was an institutional and academic tourism. Events were held here where 2,000 students came from universities throughout Colombia, Ecuador, and neighboring countries to see what was happening in Medellín. But from that very institutional, academic tourism of study centers, of classrooms, it was transferred to a desire to get to know the popular neighborhoods and then the tourist, the other tourist, forgive me for speaking like this, the one who comes a little maliciously to look for traces of drug trafficking, or consumption, or prostitution networks, sticks there and there is currently an action between Manila as a site receiving tourism and [00:15:00] Comuna 13, as a site. Since Manila is controlled, in that agreement, in that pact between tourism entrepreneurs and the local presidency, control pacts are made.

So tourists no longer bring their girls to the Manila neighborhood, but go to look for them in Comuna 13. In other words, the popular neighborhood continues to be a center of attraction for unusual tourism on a tremendous scale and there is a greed, we really wonder what it is really, but traditional tourism, popular tourism and academic tourism are mixed together, if we could say they are mixed together. They are all mixed together. Overflowing, overflowing the city, making it very expensive. You can really feel it.

Sofia: Right now, Medellin is the most expensive city in Colombia. That is, above Bogota.

Chris: [00:16:00] Mm.

Sofia: That had never happened before. So, it was always more expensive for someone from Medellín to go to Bogotá.

Carlos: No, and a job, for example, look, I had the same position, you could say the same position, in Medellin and in Bogota. And just by being in Bogota, the salary is more than double. So, Bogota is the capital, the same thing must happen in all countries of the world. But I mentioned that it is a narrow city, it has a lot of potential for growth and housing supply. When this tourism arrived, it practically took up all the interest of the businessmen and now, building cheap housing here is of no interest to anyone.

Chris: And so I would like to go into more depth on that last notion or this consequence of tourism, of the dispossession, sorry, in the city, but first, I would like to open a little on those issues of the image of Medellín that perhaps is given to foreign tourists, as you mentioned Sofia, as you mentioned Carlos, of prostitution and also drug trafficking, a note from the research I did says that recently Mayor Guitierrez announced the closure of 150 properties that are mostly linked to the platform that would have been used for purposes of sexual tourism and exploitation of children and adolescents in the capital of Antioquia. Now, first of all, it has to recapitulate the colonial imaginings of rape or coercion. Secondly, it may involve minors. Thirdly, the services provided to sex workers in a given location can easily hide the presence of organized crime . Given the complexities and contradictions present in the issue of sex tourism, in a field of work in which many are trying to overcome prejudices and criminalization. How do you two view these issues at the moment?

Sofia: Well, let's see, the first thing I would like to say is that the prostitution networks, or sexual work networks, or human trafficking networks, did not start because of the tourist movement. I mean, this city has always been a place where sex work has been one of the sectors of the economy, even during the drug trafficking era. I mean, it has always been like that. Well, the paisas have a reputation for being beautiful women. Well, so much money that has moved through this city also, let's say, is tied to that type of activity. [00:19:00] So I simply believe that the tourism boom is simply finding an old structure that is working very well. It is a structure that already existed. The same as with drugs.

I mean, what happens is that here drugs, maybe in the 90s, were not consumed so much in the same city, because they were all exported, but the structure is there and tourism simply sticks to that structure. So, here people are also very moralistic and everyone thinks it's horrible that a gringo goes with a girl, but that girl has been with the same countries here all her life . What they find terrible is that it's happening in the traditionally rich neighborhoods of the city. And that's what bothers them, because prostitution, well, we, who have always lived in the center, it has always been there, it has always existed and that dynamic is not new. So, let's say that it seems to me that the country is good, everything we have said, beautiful [00:20:00] country, but he is also very moralistic and is only shocked when they are near his house.

Carlos: Of course, but in addition to that, they were illicit business structures associated with each other, that is, drug trafficking and all these other social pathologies. Tourism gave it a real estate effect, because before, of course, but not in the rich neighborhoods.

Sofia: Either very, very punctually, or very, very hidden.

Carlos: Very hidden, right?

But, but as a source of business was seen, as I can lease and obtain, as you said, 2 thousand two hundred dollars in leases, well the business and mercantilist vision of the paisa that has it by nature, embarks and then drugs and these businesses, these illicit social pathologies were associated with a real estate version [00:21:00] .

And then, the real estate version has effects on the rental economy, on the economy of various prestigious companies. And then that becomes

Sofia: Annoying.

Carlos: A problem of a different nature.

Sofia: Annoying and visible. But what I want to point out is, for example, in the 90s, in El Poblado, there were huge farms where they were, well, like brothels and drug dealers would go there and lock themselves up, but since it was so closed off, everyone knew that these kinds of things were happening there. They would arrive, they would see the girls arrive, I mean, the whole dynamic, but it happened there punctually. Well, right, like at that time, nothing happened.

Carlos: At that time, the drug traffickers brought all the important Spanish-speaking artists . All the artists, I don't want to say any names, some are already deceased, but the most important artists were doing shows in those country houses where [00:22:00] obviously in the drug traffickers' entertainment, well, unfortunately, there are the pretty paisas girls who

Sofia: But then, of course, this was like punctually and it was like an activity that the drug traffickers did, and when this happens, it is already in your own building, in the neighborhood where you have lived all your life.

And then, it becomes very open, very scandalous, for this society that is so moralistic. I, for example, do not believe that this is a social pathology. I mean, I believe that, ultimately, just as there are men who give up their bodies and become hitmen and can suffer, their body is exposed to horrible things happening to them.

Well, there are women who also find in their bodies a way to survive and I think that, ultimately, it is an expression of inequality, right?, and of opportunity. I mean, there are many women and I know them who studied a [00:23:00] career, so it's not that they have needs, like vital ones and they decide to choose that path because it is very profitable, right?

And this is a city that allows it. So, for example, no, I don't see it from that moralistic point of view. What is true is that precisely because of that morality, as Catholic as it is that we still have in this city, there is no control mechanism because the only control mechanism is to say that it is wrong, to criminalize it and it doesn't go beyond that, and I don't think we're going to go beyond that soon. So, I don't see that, first of all, that it's not going to continue happening, I think it will continue happening. Nor do I see that there is a more intelligent attitude from the institutionality.

Carlos: Yes, the mayor's measures are more, more than anything, announcements to calm the uproar of the elite.

Sofia: That has no effect.

Carlos: It has no effect at all.

Chris: Thank you. Thank you, Sofia [00:24:00] and Carlos for bringing out those contradictions that are there within the dynamics in Medellin. Well, beyond sexual tourism and sometimes together with it, there is drug tourism. And an article from my research says that. A merchant in Medellin says that some inhabitants of La Comuna promote it as the "cradle" of Escobar to attract more clients.

It's more profitable, he says. Here they buy his T-shirts, eh, Ave Maria, everything related to Pablo sells a lot, says the man who, for security reasons, asks not to be named. And the fact is that, despite the fact that the area seems pacified by tourism, control is still in the hands of the gangs. The merchant affirms that small gangs operate there [00:25:00] like Los del Uno, Los de Dos, Los Pirusos and Los Negros.

They charge a fee for open-air businesses and even parking. Here, you cannot open a business without their permission. And the same thing happens with the Airbnbs that are just starting to open.

Now, a fellow researcher who works with activists in Colombia told me about a year ago that drug cartels in Medellin had begun using Airbnb as a way to launder money.

This has probably been the case for a long time in the regular real estate sector, but this would symbolize a direct connection between organized crime, tourism and the housing crisis. So what do you think about the possibility that drug traffickers, whether in [00:26:00] Medellin or Mexico City, are secretly owning Airbnb?

Sofia: Well, in regards to the first question or part of the question about Pablo Escobar, it is undeniable that he is a very important figure and not only as a particular figure, but because he is a stereotype of what we are. I wouldn't say that we Colombians, but I don't feel like speaking for the entire national territory, but he is a stereotype of what a paisa is. And for that reason, many people will say, "Oh, I don't want to identify with this person," but they say it like that, because we have a lot of him, just as he has a lot of us, because we have a culture that is shared.

And finally, one has uncles, friends, who seem to have some characteristics of Pablo Escobar. He is a character who is very close to us [00:27:00] .

And so the city tries, let's say, from the elite, from the institutional, to reject it, it is something that is impossible, it is impossible, how can it be denied.

Carlos: Yes, for example, in Comuna 13, part of the show or the tourist event is to make many allusions to the figure of Pablo Escobar. So, there is the guy who has the same physiognomy , as if he were an actor, a double and a series of events when Escobar has nothing to do with it. nor with the urban violence that Comuna 13 had, but it is a way in which the Popular thought sees exploiting Escobar's figure as very profitable For certain foreign tourists who still want to circulate versions, stories, which are already [00:28:00] completely mythical or legendary because they are totally invented, to attract clients.

Sofia: Yes, and also, one starts to wonder why so many people get offended. I mean, I've even witnessed moments where someone gets offended because a tourist or a foreigner says something like, "Oh, I came because it's Pablo Escobar's city and it excites me and I want a t-shirt," right?

But it's like, I don't know if you go and visit Al Capone's city. Well, it's like the same thing, it's just like a myth. He's a figure, right? Well, the criminals have also been just as attractive as the characters who are good, in fact, I would think that the evil characters are the ones who are more attractive.

So, of course, there is a lot of resentment here towards that figure, because there are still relatives of the victims, that is, it is a very recent story, but for foreigners it is simply one more story , a story of what they see in the movies. And I feel that many [00:29:00] People who are attracted to this figure have a very childish notion of the matter.

Well, you think that he is really a character from a movie, right? You don't understand that this city really exploded with bombs. You can't understand it, and I am not that old, but I had to deal with it. I mean, it's something that is too recent and this society is still very traumatized by it.

So, that's why there is so much suspicion, but at the same time, it is a business opportunity because it sells too much.

Carlos: Look, we live here, right in the center of the city, and my wife and I were very young. At night, we counted the bombs, one, two, seven, eight, because I don't know if you know the song La Noche De Chicago... by Mirta Castellanos.

Well, a song that tells the story of the confrontation [00:30:00] between gangsters in the United States against the police. That was a tremendous massacre between both sides. We lived through that here, but it wasn't with machine guns, it was with bombs. Well, I mean, this guy blew up a building in Bogotá, the DAS building.

A civilian passenger plane flew through the air, that is, a real person. And that sounds fantastic, that is not real, but that is real. This city was marked by debris from all those explosions, in addition to the youth massacres just to create chaos. Well, there were a group of kids partying in a discotheque and groups of hitmen arrived just for the sole reason that the next day on the news, there was fear in all the citizens because they thought they would win that war in that way.

Sofia: Terrorism, well, [00:31:00] so, to wrap things up a bit, for us it is still a painful story. But if you also put yourself in the shoes of someone who is in another country and has another reality, well, of course it is a highly attractive story.

And apart from that, you can go to the city that was the most dangerous city in the world, but you already know that nothing is going to happen to you. Well, okay, let's say, there is a certain security, because here the tourists are really taken care of and they are not taken care of by the police. They are taken care of because the criminal structures, as you already said, linking with the second part, the criminal structures have already given the order that nothing can happen to the tourists because they are directly linked to their business. So that is why we have a gringo , well it's a shame to say it like that , but that's what we call him , a gringo, in a popular neighborhood and it is easier for something to happen to someone who is from the same city as them . Nothing is going to happen to them, why ? Because they are a source of money and because if they are killed or if something bad happens to them, they will stop coming.

Carlos: The business [00:32:00] is damaged.

Sofia: Exactly, it's like, I don't know if you know, but here, drug stores are called plazas. And there is no safer place in the city than a plaza, because in a plaza no one is going to rob you, because it is totally controlled and you are not going to harm the business of those who own the business.

So, obviously it's very attractive and even though one could say that people who are so stupid or whatever or don't understand the story, they're not interested in the story, because it's a story that's really very attractive. Because here he told a couple of things, a couple of headlines, but everything that has to do with the drug traffickers in our region is quite fantastic.

Well, that's why they've made series about Pablo Escobar, because he really is a very interesting character, very interesting and with stories that are cinematic. So, how could the world not be attracted to that?

Carlos: The guy lived through a continuous movie firsthand, because [00:33:00] everything, the prison, the escapes, the businesses he set up, the strategy of transporting the cocaine on airplanes.

Sofia: And then, in relation to what you were saying, this strategy, as a real estate company or linked to Airbnbs, of course, doesn't seem strange to me, it's that these structures are extremely intelligent. They move forward, of course. And where a lot of money goes, there will always be something behind it, well, how do we launder money? We get so much money that we have to launder it. We're not going to launder it by selling empanadas. We're going to launder it with something that generates a lot of money. So, always, well, here they have laundered money with everything you can imagine and they have always had houses, businesses, pharmacies, for example.

Carlos: And Chris, the real estate business. When I was studying, obviously, I'm 68 years old. I mean, 35 years ago I was studying the prestigious area of El Poblado [00:34:00] it was all country houses that were accessed by rails, that is.

Sofia: Along a stone path.

Carlos: Yes, without an urban infrastructure. And in 30 years, the landscape is full of towers, absolutely full of towers, saturated. Laundered, there is no economy here for many wealthy people to develop, no, no. That can only be explained because, but it was the formal business. Yes, and that "business" in quotation marks, no, it did not cause the inconvenience like now, gentrification, before, on the contrary, all the elite valued their properties to develop towers, they filled themselves with money, with money that was certainly in a very high percentage finances to launder.

Sofia: Illegal businesses. And the growth of this city, and yes, because it is a very [00:35:00] fast growth. Well, you, you should have been the one who had El Poblado, already completely full of towers. But what I mean is that here there is not a big enough economy for that to happen so fast. So, well, it's obvious, I mean, now it seems to us like "oh, they could be the owners of Airbnb." And I would say, who else? Who else is going to be the owner of that business in this city? Who is capable of buying entire buildings? I mean, who has the money to invest?

Carlos: And to recover it against short-term yields, that is to say, it seems to me that it is a very risky investment. Because any event...

Sofia: Well, the same pandemic.

Carlos: He can throw him to the ground, right? Who can risk that? The drug dealer.

Sofia: Well, look, here in the city, traditionally, we call them "Paracas bakeries." Well, they are bakeries that sell the worst bread. I mean, nobody buys it. But they operate 24 hours.

Carlos: And they are super [00:36:00] luxurious, meaning they are very well established.

Sofia: And they are businesses that never have customers and sell horrible bread and no one buys from them, but they are always there on the best corners.

Carlos: Open all the time.

Sofia: And also, they have it tied as if that was the inauguration Pablo Escobar, well, like a surveillance system. So, in Pablo Escobar's time, it was the taxi drivers, right? There was like a network of associated taxis and I still think that works. Well, who goes to those bakeries? I mean, drug trafficking, of course, always has to have legal businesses, to be able to, well, yes, to be able to [00:37:00] be able to.

Chris: Wow, that's strong and everything, and I suppose that underneath it all, there's more evidence of more layers of organized crime, not just drug traffickers, but also the state. I think of a world-class corporation called Blackstone, which has already happened in places like Barcelona and other cities where, [00:38:00] eh, they buy a building, they move all the people, that is, all the residents inside and everything becomes an Airbnb. In other words, each apartment is an Airbnb now, like 30, 50, 100, whatever, and they employ, business after business, after business for, for example, the reservation organization systems, the cleaning. But all the workers, all the businesses are not part of Blackstone. They are like employees or freelancers, right? So there is not even a single face in this dynamic that is being brought out, displacing people from their buildings.

Sofia: No, I was going to say that suddenly here, no, it is not as visible yet as buying already inhabited buildings, but it is about building them. I mean, many buildings are already being built entirely by Airbnb with foreign or local investments, because there is a character here who is like a standard-bearer for this issue and who says that he is going to fill all of Airbnb and that he thinks that is fine.

Well, I feel like it's starting to happen. It's starting to happen.

Chris: Thank you, Sofia. And so, the effects of excessive [00:40:00] tourism , overtourism and gentrification in Medellin seem to have come very fast and strong. However, in recent years, social media accounts have emerged criticizing tourists, digital nomads or gringos for what is happening. Is that what you all see there as well and do you agree with the assessment?

Sofia: Well, let's see, resentment. Mm, I don't think it's very visible. I mean, it seems to me that there's like a lot of scandal, moralism. But well, let's see, there was like a small march around Parque Lleras against Airbnb, against child sexual exploitation, but it's not very massive. I mean, there I do feel that culturally we are. I mean, although the country can be very [00:41:00] belligerent as in its words, as if it seems very angry and furious, we are really very submissive and submissive before the God of Money. So, as long as there is business, it is accepted, it will move, right? And so, this effect, well, in fact, in other conversations we have said well, I wouldn't call it gentrification.

Well, we would call it touristification because it is something that is being generated from tourism specifically because gentrification speaks more about a displacement from one social group to another, but it does not necessarily refer to the tourist . And of course there is an effect because at this moment there is a real estate bubble.

Rents are very expensive in Medellin, the cost of living is very high. And let's say that although it is concentrated in the south, in El Poblado and in Laureles, in the west, that has a ripple effect, since it affects the rest of the city and rents have really become more expensive, let's say from the most expensive to what was cheaper. And if it affects us all, [00:42:00] but I don't see anyone even organizing themselves, right?

Carlos: Not even the relationship you established in a previous question with the housing supply. Because, let's say one thing is that some buildings are obsolete or that new buildings are developed to serve tourists, but supposedly the traditional housing supply of the city should continue, but that has not been the case.

I mean, the situation has worsened because I already mentioned it. This is a very narrow city and it is a city that has no room for expansion. It has nowhere to grow. So, when this issue reaches the real estate issue, one thought there would be a reaction, not necessarily resentment, but a social reaction.

Sofia: At least we should demand that the authorities become aware of the matter.

Carlos: Or institutional, or from the unions, but no. Because in the end there is [00:43:00] business and business overshadows everything in our culture and mentality. I believe that there is still a response to the crisis, I believe that the crisis will continue to worsen. It will continue to manifest itself and become more pronounced, and there will be a reaction or a business, institutional response.

Sofia: Oh citizen...

Carlos: Exactly, not yet, it looks very clear.

Sofia: Yes, because if you can say, well, "there are people who don't like tourists," but it's not a general thing, because again, if there is a kind of hospitable spirit or if the tourist treats you well, why are you going to treat him badly? I mean, I have not seen anyone in a business treat a tourist badly if they don't want to sell to them.

No, that's not happening. Well, then I don't think that's happening. Well, I think that the situation, let's say, economic and social, was very dense, well, it's very [00:44:00] strong here in the city and people are simply trying to survive.

Carlos: And let's say that the unrest that arose in Manila and its surroundings is because certain drug addiction and prostitution events were very visible. When the agreement to hide them is reached, then everyone is calm, because people here are very prudish. This is a simply conservative society, "Catholic" in quotation marks, and as long as the matter is not visible, then it is fine.

Sofia: I also wanted to note that, of course, there have been some small protests in El Poblado, right?, by residents who have been affected. But that does not resonate throughout the city because in the end it is rich people who are upset because they can no longer live in the rented housing, in the neighborhood where they have lived all their lives, but have to move to another less comfortable one.

But it's not like they're going to be left without the possibility of living in the city, for example. I don't think it's that critical. And that's not going to have an echo in the [00:45:00] city because a lot of rich kids are left without being able to pay for their apartment, well, or the apartment they want or in the neighborhood they want.

It's just that there is a bit of displacement, so there are new areas. That's what you call gentrification, these more traditional, more popular neighborhoods are being occupied by these upper-class people from our city who have been displaced by the upper-class people of the world, right?

And so these people who lived in these traditional neighborhoods, well, they have to go to the hillside, right? To the popular neighborhoods. And well, let's say that that is the inconvenience. But I don't feel that it is something widespread.

Or without much force, or at least not with a clear call to [00:46:00] action.

Chris: Okay, okay, well thank you very much, Sofia, Carlos. So, if there is not so much resistance in the streets, I would like to ask you about the actions of the government of Medellin. So, in my research for the episode, I read some articles that offer the following data:

Now, "Medellin has a deficit of more than 50,000 homes according to Viva, the housing company of the government of Antioquia."

Now, "Juan Camilo Vargas, director of Asohost, the [00:47:00] union of this activity in Colombia says that 40% of its operations are concentrated in Medellín and that the business is not illegal. So a mayor cannot override a national norm."

Now "And although he has not taken any concrete measures, Mayor Gutierrez has also sent out signals of possible restrictions for the short-stay business. In the city, more than 1,700 places operate without a license, according to the tourist information system."

And finally, "We are not going to do away with the platforms, but there will be regulations," the president told the council on March 4. He says, "It cannot be that in three years rents have increased so much [00:48:00] or that the lives of our families have become impossible because of short-term rentals."

So, with the local government talking about taking a tough stance against tourism-related sex trafficking and the housing crisis, given Barcelona's failures to address the consequences of tourism, even after its mayor was elected for doing exactly that, what hope do you think exists at the governmental level in Medellin?

Sofia: No, of course this is one thing, well, it's a shame to say it. But Chris, we have a mayor who thinks he's Batman. Well, he goes around in a helicopter saying that he's going to chase thieves himself, but it's all a facade and let's say that our society buys into it. But three apartments, three buildings, that is, a few businesses were closed.

That's on the front page. [00:49:00] But I, I have people close to me who have invested in Airbnb. And they haven't had any problems. They haven't been asked for anything. The police have never visited them. Of course, I think it depends a lot on the property manager, not admitting what is supposed to be not allowed on the platform, right? That we have this person close to us who is, as an investor in an Airbnb, if he says we don't admit any of that. And the times that we have had attempts to get someone to enter, the police are called, and clearly the person is expelled immediately. Well, let's say that there is a procedure, but not even that person, the police are going to take him away.

I mean, something happened to me once, and it was that I was at the gate of a unit in El Poblado and a foreigner came in with two small children, two 10-year-old children. And I thought they were [00:50:00] his children, because I thought they were his adopted children, well, well, I just saw a man come in with two children, but I was struck by how the children were dressed.

And I asked the doorman, how are those guys? Well, I was confused, but I noticed the way they were dressed. And the doorman said to me, "It's not that these gringos come to do that in that apartment and I, but why aren't we calling the police?" And he said to me, "It's that they have to be caught red-handed."

I mean, there is no procedure to deal with this either. And it is something that happens a lot, but there are no institutional tools to stop it from happening because ultimately they are protected because they are inside an apartment, because the owner of the apartment agrees. Well, let's say it's a whole chain.

So it's really difficult from a legal standpoint. What I think is that our mayor and many others that we've had are wonderful at making announcements, [00:51:00] right? Being front page news.

Carlos: Although, although there are advertisements at the airport there, you get off an international flight and in the hallway you will find...

Sofia: Yes, no, this is not allowed, but you will always be able to access it.

I mean, of course, and they are very good at making announcements, just like they have made announcements about many things. Well, like crime is going to end, I mean, many things are going to happen, but in everyday life, well, one sees that that is not true. I mean, one goes to Lleras and one continues to see, well, the whole dynamic, right? What was very scandalous, Chris, and what I think has stopped happening, which is that one went to Lleras. Well, I don't know if you are located in El Poblado, as in the best said, it is like the center of tourism, in the neighborhood of El Poblado, and one saw indigenous girls dancing for coins, right? And it was like, it was not even necessarily [00:52:00] that they were prostitutes, but that they were, let's say, doing something that people considered very undignified and that they were girls and that they were indigenous.

Next to all the, right? Sex workers who were, let's say, offering their services. And that was what alarmed people the most, like, because we have these indigenous girls, and so, well, the attitude was, they're leaving here, they can't be here anymore, we're taking the girls away from their parents. Well, a lot of actions that one knows from within will have absolutely no effect and that it's possible that these girls will have an even worse time than they already have, right? Well, I honestly don't think they're going to close Airbnb. I don't think they're going to ban Airbnb in Medellín.

Carlos: Well, I see a lot of construction going forward. And I have colleagues or friends who are former architect students who say that the business they are getting is designing and building [00:53:00] Airbnb.

Sofia: Yes. And other than that, well, because those announcements are very easy to say. Well, I have even seen that in other cities they have started to regulate. That there are areas of the city where Airbnbs are not allowed or that, let's say they have a minimum time, that is, they are 30 days minimum, so they are short stays, but of a minimum, that is, it is not, I am going to spend the weekend in Medellín and I am going to go to anyone, otherwise I am coming to work. But that has not even happened.

That is, there is no minimum regulation, so, suddenly it seems that if you read the headlines it seems that way, but until now nothing concrete has happened.

Carlos: And there are many allegations, for example, that the local president was financed by the whole real estate sector and, let's put it bluntly, related to tourism. So he, he has no moral capacity to control them.

Chris: Well, I just came across a quote from architect Joseph Bohigas, [00:54:00] and he says that "in Colombia's second city, there is still time to avoid the images that are repeated today in Barcelona," that "Medellín cannot die of success."

Carlos: Well, he said that to us because remember that I mentioned to you that there was a very strong academic tourism and a certain brotherhood between Medellín and Barcelona. Well, that is not brotherly at all, but the academy is for everything. So, this whole wave of architects and urban planners from Barcelona were here, advising the mayors, the governors for about 10 years in a row.

All the important architects of Barcelona lived here and he came here. And he told us that phrase around 2007. He was in the mayor's office finishing Fajardo when he said, "Be careful, a city can die from success." So I developed the idea and [00:55:00] more or less said, well, gentrification, rising prices, touristification were things that he announced.

Of course, this is a city without sea. People come for the mountains and the vegetation. You leave Medellin two hours away and you are like in a jungle. It is not a jungle, it is a tremendous tropical forest, very attractive. I think that is an attraction that the city also helps to bring many people, that is, Santa Fe, Antioquia, Guatape, Garden, they are relatively close municipalities, very, very attractive for those who really come to rest, right? So I think this could be an opportunity. This situation of gentrification, touristification, rising prices, real estate activity, which is, which is abandoning housing, let's say for the, for the resident. It could be the opportunity for this death of success to be confronted [00:56:00] through policies.

This requires a lot of leadership from the mayor's office, a lot. Currently, I don't see the mayor's office with a strategic understanding of what may be happening and how this could become a serious problem.

Sofia: Yes, yes, thank you, Carlos. To finish our conversation, I would like to ask you, Sofia, about the project that we got in touch with. The NN Project. I would love for you to explain to us what the NN Project is and what you do there in Medellin?

The NN Project is a non-profit corporation, which is interested in supporting processes such as cultural or social organizations, let's say in peripheral areas of the city, although we have also worked or are very interested in the, let's say, pedagogical part or the part of [00:57:00] training in topics related to heritage, with urban planning, right? As with, culture in general.

Sofia: There are several architects who are part of the organization and we are all university professors. So, well, we have an interest in pedagogy and, let’s say, this intersection of pedagogy and spatial dignity, and the interest in spaces for meeting, let’s say community spaces, has led us to support these processes, to find mechanisms or devise projects to dignify those spaces where people meet, where people generally meet to share, but also to learn and to look for ways out to manage their own lives, right? Let’s say, to overcome that inequality that often also has to do with inequality in the offer of opportunities, precisely, even from, from education.

And so, because, although education is supposedly a right in Colombia, it is not really [00:58:00] fulfilled, right? And linked a little to this idea of housing, it is also supposed that in Colombia, decent housing is a right, and that is something that we see is not fulfilled.

And, well, just now we were mentioning a little bit about the makeup of the city, and we can say that, well, those places where decent housing is not available, well, it happens mostly on the slopes, right? In the upper part of the mountain. And that is where we are working, where we see precisely that there is a type of urbanization, well, very precarious, where basic services are not covered and where a community space, well, really covers many of the needs of the people, right?

Even, well, as a space for socialization, right? As a space for finding peers, right? To confront, well, that situation. So, well, that is what we do from the NN Project and well, and let's say that we try [00:59:00] to theoretically reflect, well, on this issue of the right to the city and the right to housing, but we are also trying, well, to advance projects that have to do transversally with this issue.

Now, in the company of Carlos, Carlos will tell you a little bit about it. But Carlos is an expert in comprehensive neighborhood improvement, well, in all these interventions that can be done in these, in these places of the city, we are leading a training process, but also a constructive process, if you can call it that, of risk and disaster prevention.

Well, because in these neighborhoods the right to the city is true? These people live in precarious conditions, but in addition, they are risking their lives, right? Because they do not have the urban conditions for their home to be a safe home.

And so we are already finding [01:00:00] mechanisms to transmit some technical knowledge and to improve these living conditions. So, let's say that, for us, the right to the city also has to do with this, right? Well, the state cannot solve it. But then, as a community, we find alternatives to improve these conditions.

Carlos: I would add that for me, at least in my professional experience, the right to the city is literally the right to housing. I cannot even conceive of a city without housing supply, without housing. The city is fundamentally a place to live and within these strategies of managing housing.

Well, you know, Chris, that Colombia and Medellín are cities that are very, very determined by displacement from the regions. It is a city that receives migrant population expelled by violent phenomena , seeking opportunities, by the very attractiveness of the city, because it is a city that moves, that moves the economy.

So, the real estate sector, let's say, busy with Airbnb, the mayor's office that doesn't know where to look and people arriving from the regions expelled in many ways, is located on very, very inhospitable slopes, very difficult to train, very difficult to urbanize. So we see that there, from training, from education, from pedagogy, but always putting into practice with the network of monitoring critical points in a neighborhood, with the identification of what is a critical point, with the risk factors of the neighborhood.

We are weaving with them and the meeting place, the headquarters of Somos Por [01:02:00] Naturaleza and the NN Project, there we are building knowledge, opportunities, possibilities with the people. That's what we're doing.

Chris: Wow, that sounds like an incredible, necessary and very beautiful project. So, thank you both and also on behalf of our listeners, I would like to thank you both for being willing to talk to me about these issues today. It was also very revealing for me and I hope that little by little the right to the city, to housing, and solidarity with the people there in Medellin continues to be built. So, how can our listeners follow your work, comrades?

Sofia: Ah, well, you can follow us on Instagram, @ProyectoNN. There we try to share, well, as part of the process of the projects [01:03:00] that we have in progress and well, soon we will also update the page www.proyectonn.com

Well, you can see the things we are doing and moving forward. And also, thank you very much for the invitation.

They are always very cool topics to talk about, reflect on, and it's cool.

Carlos: So to the people of Oaxaca and to you Chris who were interested in these conversations, thank you very much.

Chris: Thank you, Sofia. Thank you, Carlos. Have a nice day.

Leave a comment

Subscribe now

S6 #1 | Ecologías del Despojo y Resistencia | César Pineda

Thu, 27 Feb 2025 16:10:57 GMT

ENGLISH TRANSCRIPT BELOW

En este episodio, mi entrevistado es Cesar Pineda, sociólogo por la Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana. Obtuvo el Doctorado en Ciencias Políticas y Sociales y la Maestría en Estudios Latinoamericanos, ambos con mención honorífica en la UNAM. Realizó estancias posdoctorales en el Instituto de Investigaciones Económicas y en la Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana Azcapotzalco. Su investigación se centra en la contradicción del capital en la naturaleza, los movimientos sociales, la autonomía, el Estado y la comunidad.

Investigador Nivel I en el Sistema Nacional de Investigadores, es profesor de asignatura en la Facultad de Ciencias Políticas y Sociales de la UNAM. A partir de 2024 es profesor-investigador de tiempo completo en el Instituto de Investigaciones José María Luis Mora. Es activista y acompañante en múltiples movimientos sociales.

Notas del Episodio

La teoria y proceso del capital como metabolismo social
Biomercantilizacion
El problema de clase
Consecuencias escondidas del ecoturismo
Limites
Autoregulacion de las comunidades
Construyendo comunidad en la ciudad
Autonomia es la clave
Un mundo donde quepan muchos mundos

Subscribe now

Tarea

Pagina profesional César Enrique Pineda (Ensayos, Libros, Proyectos)

Twitter de Cesar

Facebook de Cesar

Transcripcion en Espanol

Chris: [00:00:00] Bienvenido César, al podcast El Fin del Turismo. Muchas gracias por estar dispuesto a hablar conmigo hoy. Me gustaría comenzar preguntándote, ¿Dónde te encuentros hoy y cómo se ve el mundo para ti allá?

Cesar: Yo habito en Ciudad de México. Desde hace tiempo estoy haciendo una investigación, de nuevo, la continuidad del proceso del proceso del aeropuerto. Entonces estoy yendo muchas veces hacia Texcoco hacia el oriente de la ciudad, hacia el viejo lago de Texcoco, entonces tengo una doble mirada, la mirada urbana tradicional donde vivo y donde doy clases, que es en la UNAM y en el Mora, y por el otro lado, los pueblos, la comunidad y el el sistema lacustre al que estoy yendo cotidianamente.

Chris: Y cómo va eso en Texcoco, si te puedo preguntar?

Cesar: Va bien, creo que el frente de pueblos en defensa de la tierra ha tenido un nuevo triunfo. Y creo que es un nuevo avance, es un movimiento un poco anómalo en México porque [00:01:00] prácticamente ha ganado todas sus batallas, ha detenido los dos aeropuertos, ha liberado a sus presos y ahora ha logrado proteger el territorio.

Y hoy se encuentran frente a un nuevo reto que es ser gobierno local, no? Entonces, en todas ha triunfado al final, a pesar de los costos enormes, pues que ha sufrido por la represión, por la persecución, por la precariedad también por la que viven muchos de sus miembros. Pero creo que van muy bien.

Chris: Claro, wow, pues, qué bueno, qué hermosa resultado no? Cesar, parece, que mucho de tu trabajo, se basa en lo que podemos llamar la conversión de la naturaleza en capital, o al menos así es como los teóricos lo han descrito tradicionalmente. Me gustaría preguntar, ¿Cómo ves que eso sucede en el mundo del turismo, la conversión de naturaleza en capital para, para empezar, para darnos un [00:02:00] base de seguir?

Cesar: Sí, bueno, hay que decir que lo que he tratado de también estudiar o teorizar. Cuando teorizamos hacemos generalizaciones. La teoría es una generalización para poder dialogar en contextos distintos, en casos distintos, sino cada caso por supuesto, es totalmente distinto que el otro por su historicidad, por su localidad, por su particularidad.

Cuando teorizamos tratamos de hacer una generalización válida para muchos casos. Entonces, y eso nos permite a dialogar y pensar a muchos con una misma forma de nombrar y conceptualizar. Entonces, ese trabajo de conceptualización y teorización lo he hecho en la idea de cómo intentar comprender, se despliega efectivamente el capital territorialmente. Generalmente pensamos al capital solo como relaciones dinerarias, como inversiones y como ganancias, de hecho, compensamos el capital como, la [00:03:00] cosa, el dinero, en todo caso, como riqueza material, mercancías, puede ser ropa, puede ser autos, pero en general, el capital es un proceso. Que es lo que plantea a Marx, y el proceso es cómo la gente se organiza, organiza el trabajo, unos trabajan para otros y cómo toman efectivamente de la naturaleza lo que necesitan para producir nuevas mercancías o nuevos valores de uso, que es lo que, la utilidad que es lo que le llama Marx.

En ese sentido, producir muchos valores de uso requiere necesariamente, de algún vínculo con la naturaleza. Ese vínculo Marx le llama metabolismo social porque es un vínculo, no solo, porque tomas lo que necesitas, los materiales, por decir así, algunos les llaman recursos en la economía. Generalmente en la ecología política o en la agro ecología les llamamos bienes [00:04:00] naturales. Porque no son cosas para simplemente recursos que están ahí disponibles para gastarse. Y ese vínculo que hoy se ha desarrollado todavía más con algunos teóricos de que han seguido la idea de metabolismo social de Marx, plantean siguiendo también algunas ideas de Marx, que es la forma de organizarnos, de organizar el trabajo.

El trabajo es el vínculo con la naturaleza y ese vínculo es a la vez un intercambio de materia y de energía con los ecosistemas locales. Ese intercambio este más le llama metabolismo.

Entonces, digo todo esto porque es muy importante pensar como lo que le llamamos la economía, desarrolla ciertas formas de actividad, de trabajo material y no solo de intercambios dinerarios y monetarios, porque a veces parece que una actividad da muchas ganancias y podría estar, tomando, por ejemplo, de la naturaleza, [00:05:00] demasiados bienes naturales, aunque produzca en realidad muchas ganancias, monetarias.

Y en ese sentido, lo que he estado estudiando es precisamente cómo se despliegue el capital, buscando por decir así, lo que necesita de los ecosistemas, pero de los ecosistemas no necesita todo a veces, en ocasiones, si necesita todo el ecosistema, que eso es lo que voy a explicar, rapidísimo ahorita.

Pero en otras ocasiones, necesita solo uno de los bienes naturales, necesita tierra para cultivar y entonces acapara sea comprando, sea despojando, sea rentando la tierra. Por el otro lado, puede no necesitar el suelo para producir, no solo es la tierra para producir, sino que además necesita que esa tierra tenga climas.

Esto parece, no tan de sentido común. Lo tienen mucho más claro todos los campesinos, pero es evidente que en ciertas zonas se dan ciertas, [00:06:00] especies y en otras, por ejemplo en lugares fríos, se dan más pues la producción boscosa y por tanto, la producción, se cultiva pino y eucalipto. Y en los trópicos se cultivan frutas.

Entonces las inversiones económicas que le podríamos llamar el capital, pero ese capital es un proceso como he dicho, reorganiza los trabajadores, a las trabajadoras. Organiza también la relación con la naturaleza o la reorganiza. Entonces, doy estos ejemplos siempre porque son muy ilustrativos de lo que sucede, por ejemplo, si hay más inversiones para cultivar, para producción maderera. La producción, obviamente los quien invierte requiere su ganancia rápido. Entonces tienes que invertir y tener ganancias. Tienes que invertir y vender rápidamente la madera, por ejemplo. Por tanto, pues, se cultivan las especies que crezcan más [00:07:00] rápido.

Y por como crecen más rápido, necesitan más agua. Si necesitan más agua, agotan los mantos acuíferos. Aquí tenemos una consecuencia directa de la organización humana en la naturaleza, en como reorganizarla porque va sustituyendo el bosque nativo y lo sustituyes por especies que solo son las que se pueden vender, en este caso, pino y eucalipto.

Ahí está claro, como entonces, se reorganiza el tiempo, a los trabajadores, por ejemplo. Si hay todos los trabajadores de la industria forestal que les ofrecen un tipo de trabajo y la relación con el agua, con los ecosistemas locales y con las especies que cultivas, ahí está todo el circuito de lo que organiza.

Entonces, cuando pensamos en inversiones, no estamos pensando generalmente en lo que hay detrás. Así podríamos seguir la producción de un auto, la producción de algodón para nuestra ropa, la producción de cristal, la producción de hierro, de plásticos, todo se puede, pensar así. Y también dentro [00:08:00] de las formas de despliegue de la naturaleza, he pensado que haya en ocasiones, hay otra forma que le llamo bio mercantilización turística, que es acaparar ecosistemas completos para ponerlos, por decir así, poner a las ballenas, poner a los caimanes a trabajar, que es una forma de decirlo en el sentido de la renta de la tierra, la renta de los ecosistemas y sobre todo, la gran industria que se construye alrededor de los enclaves turísticos.

Todo esto constituye una nueva relación con la naturaleza que es, creo la que vamos a estar conversando en tu programa, porque no modifica o no solo se le ha visto generalmente al turismo como una industria benévola porque no tiene chimeneas. Es muy distinta, por ejemplo, de pues de la industria petrolera, que es la que generalmente pensamos que es la única sucia.

Pero la industria turística es [00:09:00] una industria. Lo que pasa es que es una industria de servicios. Es una industria también global. También es monopólica. O sea que está concentrada en pocas corporaciones y cambia, por supuesto, la forma de organizarnos alrededor de los ecosistemas.

Chris: Wow. Me ha dejado pensar mucho en como las cosas que parecen como tours o recorridos, quizás podrían estar promocionados como ecológicas o ecológicas, caminatas en el bosque o igual esos recorridos en el mar, en el Yucatán o aquí en Oaxaca para ir a solo ver las las ballenas o tortugas, etc. ¿Es un poco así de lo que estás hablando, no?

Cesar: Sí. Ahora hay que decir que estos servicios que tú mencionas generalmente que a veces les ponen el nombre eco turístico, son las de menor [00:10:00] producción de valor o mejor dicho, no producen valor, sino solo hay intercambio dinerario.

Pero las que tienen mayor producción de valor son la enorme infraestructura global, los hoteles y las aerolíneas. Y estos son controlados evidentemente por las grandes corporaciones y tienen un impacto gigantesco. Es decir, cuando nosotros pensamos que vamos a hacer una actividad también en Oaxaca, por ejemplo, como tú mismo dices, y que estamos viendo una actividad muy linda de reproducción de la vida de las tortugas. No estamos pensando en toda la cadena de mercancías que es una cadena de servicios que también no solo tiene nuestra huella ecológica, sino de cómo reordenan las inversiones los territorios.

En México, por ejemplo, pasamos en alrededor de principios del siglo XXI, de 7 millones de turistas internacionales a 30 o 35 millones.

Es decir, en 20 años, prácticamente se ha triplicado el [00:11:00] volumen de, turistas. Ahora, esos turistas no, además, siempre pensamos incluso los gobiernos, incluso el último gobierno ha promovido todavía más el turismo, porque se supone que eso es totalmente benéfico, porque obviamente traen una derrama económica para lugares generalmente también que son pobres.

Pero el problema de esta percepción es que no estamos, quizá a veces teniendo una perspectiva crítica donde evidentemente se va formando también una división del trabajo social y una división de la naturaleza y quién accede a ella y para qué. Son las elites mundiales, es decir, también los trabajadores asalariados del norte, que tienen mayor recursos y mayor seguridad económica, los que tienen más tiempo libre y también más recursos para acceder al ocio y la diversión.

Las clases bajas no. Entonces hay una división de entrada por el [00:12:00] dinero, por el acceso, quien puede acceder al primero, al tiempo libre. Pero no todo mundo que tenga tiempo libre tiene acceso a los servicios de ocio, diversión y turísticos. Entonces, aquí hay una doble división, una división de clase, ya viéndolo así, vamos viendo que entonces los ecosistemas no se usan simplemente, por todos, de manera igualitaria, sino que unos tienen más acceso y otros no. O unos más tienen acceso de manera paulatina y otros mucho más esporádicamente que es esa división de clase.

Pero la otra división que es muy importante es el consumo, es decir, convertir, por eso le llamo bio mercantilización, en el sentido de convertir a los ecosistemas en una mercancía que vender, esa mercancía no te la puedes llevar como, como otras, que si se producen con la mano humana, sino ecosistemas que están puestos al [00:13:00] servicio de la renta, pero también a un nuevo control. Y esto es importante, un nuevo control, del ecosistema.

Generalmente casi todos los ecosistemas del mundo tienen una gestión hasta hace muy poco tenían una gestión comunitaria. Esta gestión no es solo, que la gente comparta los bienes naturales, sino que hay reglas para compartir los bienes naturales. La premio Nobel de economía Ostrom descubrió curiosamente, se viene a descubrir en las ciencias sociales algo que en realidad los pueblos y las comunidades realizan desde hace cientos de años. O sea, para ellos no es un descubrimiento, es su forma de vida. Que es, que hay un sistema de autorregulación donde, por ejemplo, para no agotar los bienes naturales, hay sistemas de rotación. Hay sanciones para quien viole sistema de rotación, límites, por ejemplo, para [00:14:00] pescar, límites para hacer, para poner a pastar a las vacas, límites para, por ejemplo, en algunas especies que saben que si se recolecta demasiado, pueden provocar la caída de un banco, por ejemplo, de moluscos.

En fin, hay muchísimos saberes de los pueblos, donde saben cómo no agotar los bienes naturales. No quiere decir que todos los pueblos tienen sistemas de autorregulación que les llaman comunes. Pero significa que muchos pueblos sí los tienen. Cuando llega un enclave turístico, cambia este tipo de relación y cambia la gestión de puede ser de un manglar, puede ser de una laguna, puede ser de un río, puede ser de un bosque. Y se orienta hacia la venta de servicios, cambiando a veces de manera armónica con esa regulación comunitaria, a veces desplazando por completo a esa regulación comunitaria y convirtiendolos en [00:15:00] trabajadores de los servicios turísticos.

Estos dos cambios ya deberían hablarnos el tanto la perspectiva de clase como la perspectiva comunitaria, de dos formas muy violentas en realidad de desorganizar y volver a organizar, pero ya con la base de querer generar ganancias tanto a los trabajadores como a las comunidades. Y junto con las comunidades, los ecosistemas locales.

Chris: Wow. Pues sí, inmediatamente hablando de la cuestión comunitaria. Y esos cambios me ha pensado en la milpa y también como, eso fue mucho parte de la vida cotidiana de la gente. Y también pensando en la milpa, o sea ese sistema de agricultura que hay en Mesoamérica. He pensado también en esa cosa de ciertas ciudades o pueblos antiguos mesoamericanos que, fueran [00:16:00] supuestamente abandonados, pero pensando en la milpa, la necesidad de poner límites en el uso del suelo que también quizás eso tenía un lugar en el contexto de una sociedad, o al menos ciudad, o al menos pueblo entero como ya es el tiempo para dejar este lugar a su tiempo.

Pero esa cosa es algo que que ha surgido muchísimo en el podcast sobre los años, con esa cuestión de sacar límites, que el turismo es una industria que destruyen los límites.

Y pues, mencionaste al principio de Marx y también mencionamos de un poco de la ecología y has escrito un poco de marxismo ecológico. Y quería preguntarte si marxismo ecológico es solo una manera de medir y definir lo que [00:17:00] está pasando o también como reaccionar, responder, evaluar quizás.

Cesar: Yo diría que el marxismo ecológico es solo una de las tradiciones de los nuevos ambientalismos, y de las tradiciones teóricas. Porque, deberíamos separar los saberes bioculturales de los pueblos. Es decir, la forma efectivamente que son, saberes sobre la flora, la fauna, los suelos, el clima, la producción, el consumo y el desecho que las comunidades tienen. Otra vez, no todas las comunidades tienen un sistema auto regulado en torno de todo esto. Algunas si los mantienen. Otras se han, mantienen partes y otras más han perdido buena parte de su organización, y entonces empiezan a producir lo que yo llamo una perturbación metabólica. "Perturbación" viene de la teoría de sistemas, por ejemplo, nos explicaban los que se dedican a [00:18:00] eso, especialmente por ejemplo, en los ecosistemas acuíferos que, por ejemplo, cuando hay un cambio bioquímico en las aguas, por ejemplo un contaminante está entrando rápidamente, pues evidentemente, porque en una laguna muy grande, pues no se nota ese contaminante no? Es decir, pareciera que lo puede diluir. Es tanta la cantidad de agua que diluye los contaminantes, no?

Pero si hay de pronto una derrama muy importante de un contaminante. Por ejemplo, puede cambiar de color o puede cambiar, repentinamente. Esa capacidad de ilusión o de resistencia, por ejemplo, para mantener su color o mantener ciertas formas, es lo que se le ha llamado resiliencia. Y, la transformación abrupta sería una perturbación en el sistema como tal. Entonces, pensando yo en Marx y pensando en esta teoría de sistemas, pensé [00:19:00] que la idea de que tenemos este vínculo, de la organización social con la naturaleza, pensé en la idea de que la perturbación metabólica podía ser un cambio abrupto de la relación con el ecosistema.

Que no necesariamente es porque se le quita la tierra a la gente, por ejemplo, pienso en que los campesinos mismos para poder competir en el mercado, como el mercado está acaparado por grandes corporaciones que producen muy rápido, ellos tienen que empezar a comprar los paquetes tecnológicos, básicamente agrotóxicos, para producir más rápido. Entonces eso, aunque ellos tuvieran una relación más o menos, sostenible, más o menos armónica con su milpa al meter un agro tóxico, empiezan a cambiar su relación metabólica con el ecosistema, aunque no haya llegado la corporación a obligarlos, sino que ellos toman la decisión porque cada vez su producto en el mercado vale [00:20:00] menos.

Entonces tienen que producir más. Esa perturbación, por ejemplo, y esos, están organizados alrededor también de ciertos saberes. Entonces, por un lado, tenemos los saberes de las comunidades que pueden perderse, que pueden desestabilizarse o que puede cambiar, como he dicho, y por eso me refería a la perturbación metabólica comunitaria, cambia abruptamente y puede ser muy dañino para sus ecosistemas.

Y por el otro lado, tenemos una serie de saberes científicos de una, y de una serie de saberes teóricos, que podría reunirse en varias tendencias, y una de ellas es el marxismo ecológico. Hay una serie de autores, que han regresado a la lectura de Marx pensando que nos puede decir en términos ecológicos y en los textos publicados, los que Marx si quiso publicar, hay una enorme cantidad de referencias y una visión [00:21:00] que, al contrario de lo que se había pensado hasta hace poco, Marx siempre está pensando en la naturaleza.

Pero también hay un paquete de notas y de cuadernos de investigación que son los que han dado, por decir así, nuevos descubrimientos. Hasta hoy no se ha publicado todo lo que Marx escribió. Aunque muchas de esas eran notas, no eran textos como los que se conocen como Los Grundrisse o como El Capital.

Estas notas están siendo revisadas por muchos expertos, y uno de ellos, por ejemplo, dos de ellos, John Bellamy Foster, ya hace ya 20 años y Kohei Saito de Japón han encontrado en las notas de Marx que él estaba cada vez más preocupado por como la industria capitalista, la industria de la agricultura agotaba los suelos.

Entonces, resulta que Marx estaba estudiando precisamente química, estaba estudiando todo la la geología de los suelos, la composición y estaba [00:22:00] muy interesado en lo que iba a producir el capital y estaba convencido al final de su vida, solo que ya no produjo un texto para publicar, estaba muy preocupado por el descubrimiento que el mismo había pensado de que el capital agota las bases de su propia renovación.

Agota, es una forma de relación social, aunque pensamos que solo económica, pero es una relación económico-social que agota los bienes naturales. Aunque eso sí lo publicó, Marx dice literalmente, el capital socava a las dos fuentes de la riqueza. Dice, "el trabajo y la naturaleza." Y esa visión doble me parece muy importante al nombrarla en una serie de académicos que han mantenido esta investigación a partir de ciertas ideas marxistas y han seguido avanzando.

Son una veintena de ecologistas marxistas que están discutiendo hoy el cambio climático [00:23:00] que están discutiendo hoy la crisis ambiental a partir de la crítica al capitalismo.

Chris: wow.Ye wow. Entonces, mi próxima pregunta viene un poco de la capacidad de considerar esas crisis que mencionaste, dentro de otras aperturas de ecología. Entonces, pues, en la segunda temporada del podcast entrevisté a Pedro UC de Muuch Xiinbal en el Yucatán, sobre la situación el mal llamado tren maya y también con un grupo del pueblo Wixarika que hablaba sobre los invernaderos que estaban invadiendo a su región, así como sobre los cazadores furtivos de pepeyote, los turistas espirituales estaban también causando daño a sus tierras, a sus [00:24:00] relaciones, no solo económicas, pero también culturales. Quizás podemos decir espirituales. Entonces, en este contexto, a menudo se dan dos tipos de extractivismo a la vez, la transformación de la tierra en mercancía y el intento de adquisición de conocimiento o poder espiritual.

Cesar: Entonces, tengo curiosidad por saber cómo ves que estos dos mundos interactúan tanto en México como en otras partes de Latinoamérica, en esta cuestión de que la ecología también incluye la cultura y la religióna de la gente.

Sí, bueno, el capital, como relación social, tiende a mercantilizar todo. Hay que recordar, por ejemplo, yo también doy siempre como ejemplo que el maquillaje de las mujeres en realidad era, que está feminizado era el maquillaje de los pueblos. Era el embellecimiento. Todas las [00:25:00] culturas, todas, todas las civilizaciones tribales hasta grandes civilizaciones de agricultura, ya basadas en los ríos, las grandes culturas en todos los tiempos, solemos embellecer nuestros cuerpos. Solemos decorarles de muy distintas maneras, de muy distintas formas. Generalmente ligadas al proceso cultural local. El capital lo ha vuelto una mercancía.

Cesar: Es decir, en vez, si lo pensamos, antes pues todas las culturas, las tribales podían embellecer sus cuerpos, sus pieles, de múltiples maneras, sabían la técnica para hacerlo, utilizar los materiales para hacerlo, o forjar sus propias joyas, y hacer su propio vestido. Todo lo que acabo de decir, el capital lo ha convertido en una mercancía y despojado, por decir así, de los saberes.

No sabemos hoy la gente [00:26:00] que vivimos en las ciudades urbanas, modernas, totalmente capitalizadas. No sabemos hacer esas cosas. No sabemos embellecer nuestro cuerpo, o lo sabemos a partir de los materiales y las mercancías que nos vende una industria. Entonces el capital utiliza nuestras necesidades y la necesidad de embellecernos no es una frivolidad. Lo que pasa es que se convierte en una frivolidad cuando se produce en masa mercancías que efectivamente son para el embellecimiento y traen junto con ellas un marketing de embellecimiento de ciertas formas, además de belleza hegemónica.

Entonces, por qué digo este ejemplo que parece muy lejano a nuestra conversación sobre la naturaleza, porque el capital puede convertir en servicio y por tanto, en un servicio que de ganancias prácticamente cualquier forma [00:27:00] etno cultural que le llaman, cualquier forma etno turística, cualquier forma eco turística, es decir, generar ganancias a partir de los servicios de conocer, de divertirse, del ocio, de incluso del contacto social que le llaman turismo de contacto social. Es decir que busca una experiencia alternativa que puede ser gran diversión, estas máquinas que te elevan con el agua en el mar con un técnico que te acompaña, o simplemente las motonetas que en lugar, en lugares boscosos, es decir, puede ser cualquier tipo de servicio turístico que esté acompañado, acompañando a vivir una experiencia en un ecosistema que generalmente está fuera de tu ciudad.

Pero además, esta división, ciudad y lo rural o ciudad, enclave turístico o ciudad [00:28:00] también lugar del Edén, lugar paradisíaco. Esta división se ha producido, pues por la concentración de capital en las ciudades y por la concentración del trabajo en la ciudad. Entonces, lo que esta división internacional del trabajo que produce entonces ciudades que trabajan y lugares de descanso y, por tanto, trabajadores y trabajadoras que te tienen que atender para tu descanso, pues es lógico que es una división internacional que también hace que haya países productores de servicios turísticos y países consumidores o ciudades consumidoras de servicios turísticos también. ¿Porque también planteo esta enorme división? Porque, la extracción de bienes naturales es muy conocida del sur al norte y tiene que ver efectivamente también con los enclaves turísticos y la infraestructura turística que se construye.[00:29:00]

Los gustos y las necesidades de la, el turista de élite de clase media y de clase alta, requiere ciertas comodidades que no necesariamente son producidas en el ecosistema local. Entonces hay que traer, por decir así, si el turista de élite quiere fresas y luego un pan con aguacate, bueno, hay que traer fresas desde el otro lado del país, incluso del mundo, y hay que traer aguacate que que es...

¿Por qué digo estas dos? Porque la primera se produce bajo ciertas formas de explotación de jornaleros, por ejemplo, en el norte de México. Y hay que llevarlos hasta la península. Si dijéramos en el tren maya en un lugar que aparentemente podría ser, eco friendly, es decir, podría producir, intentar producir orgánicamente, no gastar agua o gastar [00:30:00] menos, o tener ciertos servicios en su localidad. Bueno, hay que traer fresas desde el otro lado, hay que traer aguacate que tiene un gran consumo de agua. Esto es muy importante, hay ciertas especies, lo que tú decías, de no hay límites. No hay límites. Si el turista quiere aguacate hay que tener aguacate y, por tanto, hay que traerlo de Michoacán, que agota también los mantos acuíferos y se expande como monocultivo.

Ahí está esta relación extractiva, no sólo del sur al norte, también de las ciudades, frente a lo rural y de los enclaves turísticos frente a los ecosistemas en general. Entonces este tipo de relaciones no son sostenibles. Este extractivismo, entonces no solo es, puede ser cultural, evidentemente, que volver mercancía, relaciones sociales, relaciones culturales que en general no eran, no entraban a la esfera de las mercancías. Por eso también llamo bio mercantilización, porque es incluir en [00:31:00] esferas de los bienes naturales, esferas de los ecosistemas al área de las mercancías, cuando antes no lo eran, generalmente es el agua lo que pensamos. Antes no era una mercancía. Ahora, cada vez más, hay un intento, porque lo sea.

Entonces, en este doble sentido de extractivismo, me parece muy importante hacer la claridad de que los enclaves turísticos son también una forma de extracción y de descampesinización. Otra vez, hace una perturbación metabólica porque el campesino que no puede acceder con la propia venta de su producto, ve como una opción el trabajar en un hotel, ve como una opción abandonar la tierra. Y si se abandona la tierra, entonces se puede rentar para otras cosas, o se puede deforestar o se puede urbanizar esa tierra si el campesino... la mejor forma de cuidar la tierra es que el campesino la siga cultivando.

Pero si [00:32:00] la abandona, le puede suceder cualquier cosa a la tierra. Y terminamos efectivamente con un enclave turístico que incluso puede tener, insisto, una perspectiva verde, decir que está produciendo, que tiene comida orgánica o que recicla las aguas o que hace este tipo de acciones que son evidentemente muy positivas, pero en comparación con el cambio metabólico que va a producir en los campesinos del ecosistema local, abandonando la tierra y considerando el enorme consumo que tiene que llevar de otras partes del país y del mundo para el consumo de élite, pues parece que es insuficiente reciclar el agua, no dar popotes o tener una dieta vegetariana en un hotel.

Es decir, la perturbación del ecosistema y la extracción de bienes naturales de otros lugares y el más importante, el agua, [00:33:00] simplemente no son cambios mitigables, no son cambios que se pueden comparar con las pequeñas acciones de cuidado ecológico que, por supuesto, todos tenemos que hacer, y todos tenemos que educarnos en ellas, pero a nivel estructural, por supuesto, el enclave turístico es más destructor, enclave corporativa, enclave industrial, enclave de oligopolios, enclave de gran consumo. Que estas acciones que mencionan.

Chris: Gracias César. Pues una cosa que solo pude entender cuando ya he empezado trabajando en la industria turística, era de como cada lugar que fui a visitar en el mundo antes, aunque si me quedé una semana, dos semanas, un mes o igual como tres, seis meses, [00:34:00] no me quedé suficientemente tiempo para entender la consecuencia de mis movimientos allá.

Y entonces creo que eso se queda muy fuerte, que los turistas tienen una responsabilidad que está totalmente, no totalmente, pero casi totalmente alejado de su capacidad para saberlo, para entenderlo, y, pero cuando hablamos del poblador campesino, que no solo tiene como ciertas fuerzas económicas, pero también siento que deseos culturales, o sea, como ese sueño americano, que ahora es un sueño global y eso.

Pero por ejemplo, me quedé pensando los pueblos de Oaxaca que hacen ecoturismo, y ecoturismo basado en el municipio, en la asamblea, como una manera de quedarse la gente en el pueblo, generar ingresos y quizás también entrarse [00:35:00] con un vínculo y relación de hospitalidad que va más allá de la industria turística, por ejemplo, pero también la mera presencia del extranjero, extranjera en un lugar así cambia, lo que existía en el pueblo antes . Y en muchos pueblos, si hay gente que dicen, pues no, "fue un error." Y hay otros que dicen "no, o sea, está alimentando, muy bien, el pueblo." Entonces quería preguntarte qué piensas de esas, no necesariamente contradicciones, pero distintas reflexiones y consideraciones.

Cesar: Yo creo que es una alternativa, efectivamente, cuando viene como proyecto de los propios pueblos. Y cuando los pueblos tienen un proceso organizativo que les permite, afrontar el reto de una empresa comunitaria, de una cooperativa comunitaria [00:36:00] de servicios comunitarios y establecer efectivamente las reglas, y las formas de regulación de visitar, sea una comunidad, un ecosistema, en fin.

Es decir, creo que cuando viene desde abajo, es una verdadera alternativa, aunque yo diría que es indispensable combinar con las formas de producción campesina que, insisto, se deterioran y se deteriora todos los ecosistemas.

Entonces, creo que sería una forma desde abajo. El problema es cuando se impone desde arriba. Como en el tren en maya, donde se abren zonas hacia el turismo, donde formalmente se va a cuidar, discursivamente se va a cuidar estos elementos, pero hemos visto cómo la captura, por ejemplo, de las playas, cómo la captura y espacialización de los negocios con gran [00:37:00] inversión, acaparan por ejemplo, el comercio, acaparan el acceso a las playas, acaparan incluso la forma de urbanización. No son combinables, es que hay gente que piensa que lo comunitario puede combinarse armónicamente con las grandes inversiones del gran capital y con el gran capital corporativo turístico.

Pero pues tienen lógicas distintas. No es que sea una buena y una mala no es una cuestión de moral, es una cuestión de organización social. Si el turista está de acuerdo, por ejemplo, en adecuarse a una dieta que localmente tenga una menor huella ecológica, y además se puede programar los límites como tú también destacabas de la capacidad de visita y la carga que puede tener la visita hacia el lugar en específico, puede ser perfectamente una alternativa, aunque [00:38:00] hay que decirlo, lo que pasa es que si cambiamos de escala, no es viable que mil millones de europeos y norteamericanos estén viajando todo el mundo. No no pueden producir tanto Co2, es decir, no pueden, entonces tenemos y hasta ahora no hay una discusión global sobre esto.

Está en la discusión sobre los jets de los multimillonarios porque de por sí, un vuelo es muy contaminante, pero los jets son todavía más porque están dedicados al confort y para viajes que no son indispensables, sino de lujo. Entonces, si pensamos en la, en lo que habría que no solo regular, sino prohibir, los vuelos en jet, en la explosión gigantesca de las aerolíneas a nivel internacional, incluso en vuelos comerciales y no privados es insostenible.

La industria de las aerolíneas dice que ellos solo producen el 1% [00:39:00] del Co2 mundial. Si, pero así cada industria dice no es que yo solo produzco el 2% o el 5%, o el 0.5%. Claro, entonces, al final, nadie es responsable de la producción de Co2, porque cada uno puede decir yo soy tan poco responsable que no me regulen, pero no es viable.

Entonces, creo que tendríamos que pensar en turismo local, con acortar las cadenas de mercancías de producción de servicios turísticos. Es decir, pensando en que son los nacionales, los conacionales y los internacionales tienen que ser regulados.

Bueno, incluso que tú conocerás más, yo conozco mucho más el turismo comunitario y los impactos comunitarios y menos el impacto del turismo barrial y urbano que viven varias ciudades europeas y que prácticamente está fuera de control en París, en Barcelona, está fuera de control y junto con Airbnb o otras [00:40:00] plataformas que permiten la llegada masiva de gente o incluso la visita permanente de extranjeros que no tiene que ver con su nacionalidad, no es una cosa xenofóbica, sino en el sentido del desplazamiento que no lo quieren los extranjeros, por ejemplo, en México, no es que sean malos, no es que sean, que sean extranjeros. Insisto, no es una cuestión ni racial ni xenofóbica, sino en el sentido de que los extranjeros en México, en la ciudad de México, no en una comunidad, no en un ecosistema todavía, protegido en un ecosistema, digamos más armónico que el de la ciudad, está siendo desplazada a la gente porque la capacidad dineraria, la capacidad de ingreso, la capacidad de clase desplaza la habitación en las colonias como Roma y Condesa.

Entonces, por eso es muy importante que, cuando pensamos las alternativas, creo que tenemos que mirar todas estas [00:41:00] escalas, para la comunidad por supuesto, creo si, insisto si, si viene desde la comunidad como proyecto comunitario. Yo creo que es un proyecto que puede fortalecer el proceso, puede seguir manteniendo ciertos equilibrios ambientales y puede ser una alternativa económica de ingreso para las comunidades.

Si lo vemos como estructura internacional, el turismo comunitario se queda muy corto para la capacidad de que, que los últimos 40 años de neoliberalismo han creado en infraestructura. Es decir, si hoy se puede viajar a cualquier lugar del mundo también a menor precio es porque hay más aerolíneas, es porque hay más infraestructura, porque hay más competencia, porque hay paquetes de crédito.

Es decir, hay una mega industria, porque hay una enorme marketing para venderte vuelos, para ofrecerte, vuele ahora y pague después. Esa industria gigantesca mundial es insostenible, no puede viajar tanta gente al mundo, lo vamos [00:42:00] a reventar. Bueno, lo estamos reventando, estamos reventando al mundo con la movilidad turística internacional que cada vez es más incontrolable, y por el número. Otra vez, los turistas no son malos. El problema es la enorme cantidad de turistas que, efectivamente, por cantidad agotan el peyote en el norte, dejan sucia las playas, consumen más agua, requieren más energía eléctrica.

Es decir, la industria en su forma corporativa e industrial internacional es insostenible. Creo que hay que pensar cómo se podría reducir los impactos hacia un turismo comunitario controlado por los propios pueblos. Y ahí, yo creo que esa es la alternativa.

Chris: Mm. Mm. Gracias, César. Y pues, por lo que he leído, parece te metes mucho en la cuestión de autonomía y la emancipación de los pueblos. [00:43:00] Así como me gustaría preguntarte también, como crees que esos entendimientos puede ayudar a la gente urbana también para construir comunidad, comunalidad y solidaridad.

Es algo que pensamos mucho como ah, pues ellos allá tienen la respuesta porque terreno y territorio, pero nosotros, como inquilinos, etcétera, que pues quizás jamás en nuestras vidas van a tener casa o territorio o terreno.

Cesar: Bueno, primero mi interés es porque, en general, hasta 1989 hubo 200 años de una promesa, encabezada por la izquierda política. Y cuando me refiero a la izquierda política, no me refiero solo a los partidos, me refiero a un proyecto de superación de organización de la sociedad que prometió libertad, igualdad, fraternidad.

El proceso por el cual, se [00:44:00] deterioraron los proyectos y los horizontes de transformación es muy grave, o sea, se ha pensado, hoy estamos, prácticamente resignados, resignadas, aunque hay millones que no, pero parece que si ese es el espíritu, el mood dirían los jóvenes, el mood de la época es que no hay una alternativa que, como han planteado Fredric Jameson o Žižek, es más fácil, pensar en el fin de la humanidad que en el fin del capitalismo, o en el fin del mundo que el fin del capitalismo. Entonces, estoy muy preocupado por pensar alternativas, y pensar efectivamente horizontes políticos, insisto político en un sentido amplio, no político partidario, sino político como la capacidad que tenemos, como incluso como especie para ponernos de acuerdo y tener horizontes de que queremos hacer, qué vida queremos, qué vida, qué proyecto de vida también deseamos y podemos [00:45:00] construir. De hecho, eso es lo que nos define como especie, que nos damos nuestra propia forma organizativa. Es la especie que puede tener una forma en China y otra forma en los Andes, y otra forma en Norteamérica, y otra forma en Sudáfrica.

Cesar: Es decir, distintas formas de organización social que reproducen la vida y reproducir la vida, puede hacerse de manera muy despótica o de manera mucho más libre. Y en ese sentido, me he involucrado, si tengo muchísimo tiempo, quizá década y media o dos décadas, pensando entonces, cuáles han sido los elementos emancipatorios que ha habido en esos proyectos. Y en realidad lo que pensamos que fue el socialismo o el comunismo, que fueron en realidad experiencias autoritarias de partidos únicos y de élites, tenían en su germen otras ideas que era que el poder de los trabajadores, la autogestión de los trabajadores fuera la [00:46:00] nueva forma de organización social. Es decir, que los trabajadores tomaran las decisiones de la producción.

Lo que yo veo en América Latina, donde hay un movimiento obrero menos importante, o menos grande, como lo fue el movimiento obrero en Europa, también en Estados Unidos, es que las formas originales no capitalistas permiten también reproducir la vida de otros modos, de modos comunitarios y de otros modos.

Estos dos elementos en el norte de Europa, el poder de los trabajadores para controlar reproducción, los pueblos originarios controlando sus propios ecosistemas locales. Me parece que nos dan lecciones de otras formas de organización social. Acabo de publicar un texto, un libro, que habla de la producción de comunidad en las ciudades. Es una investigación en ciudad de México, donde un movimiento [00:47:00] masivo... es decir que generalmente también pensamos la comunidad como una cincuentena de personas, poquitas.

Esas son miles de familias que han podido constituir, construir comunidades urbanas de la nada. No, no eran pueblos originarios que se desplazaron a la urbe, a la periferia como si ha sucedido, por ejemplo, en El Alto en Bolivia, sino clases populares, con muy bajos ingresos, que en la búsqueda de vivienda encontraron que no solo querían vivienda, sino también querían mejorar y dignificar su propia vida. Insisto de clases populares muy precarias. Y lo que han c onstruido, Raúl Zibechi, uno de los periodistas, intelectuales más conocidos de América Latina porque ha estado en prácticamente todos los movimientos sociales del continente. Desde el cono sur hasta México, desde la Araucanía de Chile hasta la Selva Lacandona en México. Lo llevamos [00:48:00] a que visitara esta experiencia aquí en Ciudad de México y dijo esta es la autonomía urbana más importante de América latina. Y concluyo diciendo en el tema de la autonomía. Entonces estoy muy interesado en no por estudiarlas desde la ciencia social como un objeto de estudio, sólo para saber cómo funcionan, sino porque al comprender cómo funcionan, nos dan alternativas a quienes no estamos en esas comunidades.

Entonces, estoy muy interesado en conocer esas experiencias, rastrearlas históricamente, estudiarlas y entenderlas, y comprenderlas y aprender de ellas. Es decir, yo lo que quiero es que ese aprendizaje que han producido esas comunidades podamos comprenderlos otros que no vivimos en comunidad. Y, por último, un aprendizaje que de una noción que ha surgido después de la caída del muro de Berlín ha sido precisamente la autonomía, porque frente a las experiencias autoritarias de Europa del este, pues pareciera que [00:49:00] nadie queremos repetir una experiencia que, aunque rechazamos las formas capitalistas y liberales de la política, no queremos tampoco una experiencia autoritaria y centralizadora, y mucho menos totalitaria de un partido único que es el que decide todo.

Lo que hemos encontrado a tanto teórica como en estos casos empíricos es que la autonomía, la capacidad de darse sus propias leyes, eso significa autonomía, pero más allá de las leyes, es gobernarse a sí mismo. En realidad es la emancipación. Emancipación significa quitarse de encima la mano del señor. ¿Qué señor? Era el señor feudal, así se creó más o menos la palabra desde, o del esclavo desde hace muchísimo tiempo. Quitarse de encima la mano del amo o del amo o del señor feudal, es decir que no te mande alguien más.

Eso es vivir también en libertad, pero las comunidades viven en colectivo y para emanciparse requieren quitarse [00:50:00] ahora de una mano que es invisible, la mano del mercado, la mano del capital. Entonces, como nos emancipamos también en colectivo y la autonomía. Gobernarse a si mismo, significa también poner un freno a las decisiones de estados que generalmente en América Latina han tenido una perspectiva colonial en relación a los pueblos indígenas, o neocolonial, o también de colonialismo interno, como decía don Pablo González Casanova.

Ahora, por último, la autonomía, entonces la considero, es el elemento central, incluso más allá del igualitarismo económico. Son dos proyectos distintos. Es decir, cuando la gente logra dignificar su vida, creo que es muy positivo, creo que todos quienes tenemos una perspectiva crítica emancipatoria o incluso de izquierda, queremos que la gente en general vivamos dignamente, no con grandes lujos, pero tampoco con una enorme precaridad donde a veces, pues si muchas comunidades viven en una enorme precaridad. [00:51:00] Pero lo que es más interesante es que sean los propios pueblos los que decidan como vivir y que decidan que es pobreza y que decidan que es dignificar, y que no se decida desde el estado, ni desde la academia, ni desde los estudiosos de el igualitarismo.

Qué es lo que necesitan sus vidas, y cuando los pueblos logran controlar sus vidas, nos enseñan, otra forma de libertad. En ese sentido creo que estas experiencias también son reunidas para precisamente seguir la discusión de cómo sociedades que ya no tenemos organización comunitaria, que no tenemos una trama de organización tampoco en la fábrica, podríamos emular, replicar algunas de las prácticas, algunas de las formas organizativas para vivir efectivamente y regular la sociedad de una manera a otra, una manera más libre, una manera más igualitaria.

Ese es un poco también el trabajo que he estado haciendo, que tiene que ver con [00:52:00] esta preocupación de, yo creo que hay mucho, muchísimas alternativas, pero ya no hay una alternativa que llame a todos, , que fue lo que movilizó en el siglo XX a muchísimos a muchísimas, a millones y millones de personas que incluso dieron su vida por hacer un cambio, un cambio que llamaban revolucionario. Y me parece que hoy, a pesar de que tenemos muchas más experiencias alternativas de base de los pueblos, de alternativas agroecológicas, de alternativas comunicacionales, de formas de regulación, de nuevas formas de establecer las relaciones de género, tenemos múltiples alternativas y múltiples teorías.

Hoy pareciera que no, no los podemos, articular, digamos, en un proyecto común y a lo mejor necesitamos algunos elementos comunes, no para crear una sociedad que toda sea igual, sino al contrario, como decían, como dicen los zapatistas, un mundo donde quepan muchos mundos, muchas alternativas, pero [00:53:00] pensadas en muchas formas también de, de relación social comunal, igualitaria, libre y emancipadas.

Chris: Mm. Sí, pues a través de ese comentario sobre la autonomía y la dignidad, y la diversidad que puede venir cuando tenemos esa libertad, quería preguntarte si podrías imaginar de un futuro sin turismo como lo estamos criticando el día de hoy, quizás un tipo de ocio, o viaje, o interculturalidad, que podrías imaginar, ¿Qué planteas en la conversación para la gente antes de terminamos aquí?

Cesar: Si, primero, sobre esto del turismo, creo que deberíamos pensar que el mundo está terminando tal y como lo conocíamos. No hay ya condiciones, nos [00:54:00] dirigimos efectivamente, a un posible colapso sistémico si seguimos consumiendo energía y materia al ritmo que lo estamos haciendo. Y cuando digo al ritmo que lo estamos haciendo, reconociendo que los pobres consumen menos agua, por ejemplo, hay un estudio de familias del agua en ciudad de México donde algunas familias, las más pobres de la ciudad, consumen solo unos 50 litros, y en cambio, las más ricas o las más adineradas consumen más de 1000 litros al día, una sola familia.

Entonces, me parece muy importante, entender estas diferencias de clase vinculadas a, la naturaleza y por el otro lado, pensar que todos, que hemos vivido, lo decía un empresario en un documental, dice, estamos volando un momento de la historia donde parece muy lindo porque hemos tenido una serie de comodidades que ninguna civilización pudo tener.

Es decir, conocer el [00:55:00] planeta entero porque tenemos esa oportunidad cuando tenemos un poco de dinero, incluso aunque no seamos ricos, tenemos la capacidad, por la infraestructura, por las fuerzas productivas, porque efectivamente hay una red mundial que lo permite. Pero esto es insostenible, como son insostenibles muchos de los lujos.

Es muy lamentable tener que pensar que ese lujo turístico debe terminar. Quizá en una sociedad donde pudiéramos decidir que preferiríamos. Pues, por supuesto, en mi caso, yo decidiría también conocer muchos lugares y reducir mi huella ecológica en muchísimas otras cosas que no son indispensables, pero eso solo sería posible, es decir, mantener el turismo. No bajo la forma corporativa que tenemos hoy. Si pudiéramos reducir nuestro consumo, por ejemplo, en el vestido, nuestro consumo eléctrico, nuestro consumo, por supuesto de carbono, entre muchos otros contaminantes y consumo de materia y energía.

Entonces creo que [00:56:00] habría que pensar que en la nueva sociedad, que se tiene que construir, y a veces la gente lo ve a uno como loco, como diciendo, pero cómo, eso no va a suceder. El capitalismo está funcionando perfectamente. Pero estamos en un memento ya de transición, estamos, lo que sucedió con el huracán el año pasado aquí en México, en Acapulco, lo que sucedió en Valencia, son solo las primeras señales de muchísimas más que hay que no son conocidas. Estas fueron tragedias humanas y por tanto, se conocieron más. Pero ya vivimos una transición en términos del sistema tierra, que no sabemos qué va a suceder y debemos prepararnos para eso. Entonces, creo que debemos pensar más bien en cómo sería una sociedad alternativa donde el turismo comunitario y el turismo a baja escala, y el turismo controlado, o mejor dicho, regulado con bajo impacto de huella ecológica fuera posible, pensando en toda su cadena de mercancías, toda su cadena de servicios.[00:57:00]

Creo que ese es el horizonte que deberíamos trazar en torno del turismo. Y mientras tanto, seguir apoyando las alternativas de los pueblos por controlar sus ecosistemas cuando deciden efectivamente, abrirlos al turismo, en cualquiera de sus formas.

Y por el otro lado, y para cerrar efectivamente, hay decenas de aprendizajes de lo que donde yo me he acercado, y me he acercado también, precisamente porque he visto no solo esperanza, sino formas alternativas de relación social.

Digo algunas, se puede crear comunidad urbana. Las clases populares tienen una capacidad política propia que se tiene que desarrollar, no es automática, no está ahí por su esencia popular, sino que puede generar sus propias formas políticas en un largo proceso de aprendizaje que permite entender que la comunidad es también una forma de ejercicio del [00:58:00] poder, una forma que regula también las posiciones, actitudes egoístas y las posiciones que se aprovechan de los otros, y las reprime, las suprime, pero también permite la producción de comunes, de beneficio común y la producción de nuevas relaciones sociales que satisfacen a todos y a todas, porque no son solo relaciones materiales, sino relaciones también emocionales, vínculos afectivos, satisfacción por servir a otros. Es decir, la comunidad si puede reproducirse en las ciudades, a diferencia de nuestra noción, de que solo en las comunidades rurales puede producirse, o en el ámbito rural puede producirse comunidad.

Estos elementos son muy importantes. Por el otro lado, que la enorme riqueza biocultural de los pueblos, a pesar del deterioro ecosistémico, a pesar del avance de la urbanización, a pesar del deterioro de [00:59:00] los campesinos como clase social, a pesar del cambio climático, los pueblos siguen resistiendo. Ya han encontrado formas maravillosas para mantener cohesionadas sus comunidades, para reorganizarse, para tener sus propios horizontes político-comunitarios, sus autonomías y los saberes bio culturales que guardan, que ahora lo estoy precisamente investigando, como decía yo, en el caso de Texcoco, que es aprender de su relación con las otras especies, con las algas, las algas del lago de Texcoco, con las aves, con los suelos, suelos que no eran fértiles o que tienen una producción diferencial en en el maíz, en las otras especies que cultivan, sus propios saberes del cultivo, la combinación de cultivo, su relación con la tierra.

Hablan de un, digamos de un cúmulo civilizatorio de ellos, pero de toda la humanidad. [01:00:00] Pues que nos da esperanza porque esos conocimientos, yo siempre les digo a mis estudiantes, imaginen en cuánto tiempo pasó para que pudiéramos aprender cuál hongo era comestible, cuál era alucinógeno y cuál no es comestible. Es un aprendizaje vital, no por, solo por los hongos, sino pero lo podemos reproducir en todos, el maíz, las frutas, las verduras, las hierbas medicinales.

Es un conocimiento que no es de nadie. Es un común. Está abierto para todos y con ese podemos sobrevivir, los conocimientos sobre las semillas, sobre las aguas, sobre los ecosistemas locales. Y ese, los pueblos además están compartiendo esos saberes.

Creo que con la idea de que la comunidad puede ser producida en la ciudad y que los saberes bio culturales no solo son de los pueblos locales, sino son los saberes de las grandes civilizaciones humanas, creo que tenemos dos herramientas para afrontar el enorme peligro que tenemos hoy frente al cambio [01:01:00] climático y los otros problemas ambientales que tenemos hoy, especialmente la sexta extinción masiva de las especies, la sedificación de los océanos, entre otros elementos. Pero tenemos dos grandes cúmulos de conocimiento humano que es milenario, y que ese nos puede permitir sobrevivir aquí y ahora, y hacia el futuro, que va a ser difícil, pero la organización de los pueblos, la organización de las clases populares, las alternativas que están ya instaladas en al menos las que yo conozco en toda América Latina, dan muestra que podemos tener alternativas viables, más libres, más horizontales, más democráticas, más emancipatorias.

Chris: Mmm, vaya. Pues gracias, gracias César, por esos dos champiñones, lo comestible y de lo que está pasando en el día de hoy y también lo alucinógenico, lo que podemos imaginar en [01:02:00] otros mundos. Fue un gran gusto y honor para pasar este tiempo contigo. Entonces, me gustaría agradecerte, en el nombre de nuestros oyentes también.

Y antes de terminar, solo me gustaría preguntarte si hay alguna manera de que los oyentes puedan seguir tu trabajo, ponerse en contacto contigo, leer tus libros, etcétera.

Cesar: Sí, la forma más fácil es, utilizo X. . Que nombre tan horrible , pero es @cesarpinedar, con r al final, @cesarpinedar. Y también en mi página, enriquepineda.info, ahí en realidad están todos mis textos.

Publico muchísimo en redes sociales, especialmente en X. Yo le sigo diciendo Twitter porque el verbo Twittear es mejor. ¿Cómo se dice ahora con X cuando publicas algo? Entonces, supongo, pero es más aburrido. En fin, les invito, agradecerte a ti mucho tus preguntas y esta conversación y esta [01:03:00] posibilidad de difundir un poquito de lo que sabemos y un poquito también de nuestro saber, que es un saber también entre muchos otros, muy diversos y legítimos y válidos todos.

Entonces, agradecerte también por esta conversación

Chris: Gracias, César.

Leave a comment

Subscribe now

ENGLISH TRANSCRIPT - Ecological Marxism w/ Cesar Pineda

Chris: [00:00:00] Welcome Cesar, to the podcast The End of Tourism. Thank you very much for being willing to talk to me today. I'd like to start by asking you, where are you today and what does the world look like for you there?

Cesar: I live in Mexico City. For some time now I have been doing research, again, on the continuity of the airport process. So I often go to Texcoco, towards the east of the city, towards the old Texcoco lake, so I have a double view, the traditional urban view where I live and where I teach, which is at UNAM and Mora, and on the other hand, the towns, the community and the lake system that I visit daily.

Chris: And how is that going in Texcoco, if I may ask?

Cesar: It's going well, I think the people's front in defense of the land has had a new victory. And I think it's a new advance, it's a somewhat anomalous movement in Mexico because [00:01:00] it has practically won all its battles, it has stopped the two airports, it has freed its prisoners and now it has managed to protect the territory.

And today they are faced with a new challenge, which is to be a local government, right? So, in all of them they have triumphed in the end, despite the enormous costs, because they have suffered from repression, from persecution, from the precariousness in which many of their members live. But I think they are doing very well.

Chris: Yeah, wow, well, what a great, what a beautiful result, right? Cesar, it seems that a lot of your work is based on what we can call the conversion of nature into capital, or at least that's how theorists have traditionally described it. I'd like to ask, how do you see that happening in the world of tourism, the conversion of nature into capital to, to start with, to give us a [00:02:00] basis to follow?

Cesar: Yes, well, I have to say that I have also tried to study or theorize. When we theorize, we make generalizations. Theory is a generalization in order to be able to dialogue in different contexts, in different cases, otherwise each case of course is totally different from the other due to its historicity, its locality, its particularity.

When we theorize, we try to make a generalization that is valid for many cases. So, and that allows us to dialogue and think about many with the same way of naming and conceptualizing. So, I have done this work of conceptualization and theorization in the idea of how to try to understand how capital is effectively deployed territorially. Generally, we think of capital only as monetary relations, as investments and as profits, in fact, we compensate capital as, the [00:03:00] thing, money, in any case, as material wealth, merchandise, it can be clothes, it can be cars, but in general, capital is a process. That is what Marx proposes, and the process is how people organize themselves, organize work, some work for others and how they effectively take from nature what they need to produce new merchandise or new use values, which is what, utility is what Marx calls it.

In this sense, producing many use values necessarily requires some connection with nature. Marx calls this connection social metabolism because it is a connection not only because you take what you need, the materials, so to speak, some call them resources in economics. Generally in political ecology or in agroecology we call them natural goods [00:04:00] . Because they are not things but simply resources that are there available to be spent. And this connection, which has been developed even further today by some theorists who have followed Marx's idea of social metabolism, propose, following also some ideas of Marx, that it is the way to organize ourselves, to organize work.

Work is the link with nature and this link is at the same time an exchange of matter and energy with local ecosystems. This exchange is more commonly called metabolism.

So, I say all this because it is very important to think about how what we call the economy develops certain forms of activity, of material work and not only of monetary and monetary exchanges, because sometimes it seems that an activity gives a lot of profits and it could be, taking, for example, from nature, [00:05:00] too many natural goods, even though it actually produces a lot of monetary profits.

And in that sense, what I have been studying is precisely how capital is deployed, looking, so to speak, for what it needs from ecosystems, but sometimes it does not need everything from ecosystems, sometimes it does need the entire ecosystem, which is what I am going to explain very quickly now.

But in other cases, he needs only one of the natural resources, he needs land to cultivate and then he monopolizes it either by buying, or by dispossessing, or by renting the land. On the other hand, he may not need the soil to produce, not only does he need the land to produce, but he also needs that land to have a climate.

This seems to be not so common sense. All farmers are much clearer about it, but it is clear that in certain areas certain species are found and in others, for example in cold places, they are found more because forest production and therefore production, pine and eucalyptus are grown. And in the tropics, fruits are grown .

So economic investments that we could call capital, but that capital is a process as I said, reorganizes the workers, the workers. It also organizes the relationship with nature or reorganizes it. So, I always give these examples because they are very illustrative of what happens, for example, if there are more investments to cultivate, for wood production. Production, obviously, those who invest require their profit quickly. So you have to invest and have profits. You have to invest and sell the wood quickly, for example. Therefore, the species that grow the fastest are cultivated .

And because they grow faster, they need more water. If they need more water, they deplete the aquifers. Here we have a direct consequence of human organisation in nature, in how to reorganise it because it replaces the native forest and replaces it with species that can only be sold, in this case, pine and eucalyptus.

It is clear that, as in the past, time is reorganized, for example, for workers. If there are all the workers in the forestry industry who are offered a type of work and the relationship with water, with local ecosystems and with the species that are cultivated, there is the whole circuit of what is organized.

So when we think about investments, we are not generally thinking about what is behind them. So we could follow the production of a car, the production of cotton for our clothes, the production of glass, the production of iron, of plastics, everything can be thought of like that. And also within [00:08:00] Of the forms of deployment of nature, I have thought that there is sometimes, there is another form that I call tourist bio-commodification, which is monopolizing entire ecosystems to put them, so to speak, to put whales, to put alligators to work, which is a way of saying it in the sense of land rent, ecosystem rent and above all, the great industry that is built around tourist enclaves.

All of this constitutes a new relationship with nature, which is, I think, what we are going to be discussing in your program, because it does not modify or not only has tourism been generally seen as a benevolent industry because it does not have chimneys. It is very different, for example, from the oil industry, which is the one we generally think is the only dirty one.

But the tourism industry is [00:09:00] an industry. The thing is that it is a service industry. It is also a global industry. It is also monopolistic. In other words, it is concentrated in a few corporations and it changes, of course, the way we organize ourselves around ecosystems.

Chris: Wow. It's gotten me thinking a lot about how things that seem like tours could perhaps be promoted as ecological or eco-friendly, like hikes in the forest or even those tours on the sea, in the Yucatan or here in Oaxaca to go just to see the whales or turtles, etc. Is that kind of what you're talking about?

Cesar: Yes. Now it must be said that these services that you generally mention, which are sometimes called eco-tourism, are those with the lowest [00:10:00] production of value or rather, they do not produce value, but rather there is only monetary exchange.

But the ones that have the greatest value production are the enormous global infrastructure, the hotels and the airlines. And these are obviously controlled by the big corporations and have a gigantic impact. That is, when we think that we are going to do an activity in Oaxaca, for example, as you say, and that we are seeing a very nice activity of reproduction of the life of turtles. We are not thinking about the whole chain of goods, which is a chain of services that also has not only our ecological footprint, but also how investments reorder the territories.

In Mexico, for example, around the beginning of the 21st century, we went from 7 million international tourists to 30 or 35 million.

That is, in 20 years, it has practically tripled [00:11:00] volume of tourists. Now, these tourists don't, in addition, we always think that even governments , even the last government, have promoted tourism even more, because it is supposed to be totally beneficial, because obviously they bring an economic spillover to places that are generally also poor.

But the problem with this perception is that we are not, perhaps sometimes, having a critical perspective where a division of social labor and a division of nature and who has access to it and for what purpose is evidently also being formed. It is the global elites, that is, also the salaried workers of the north, who have greater resources and greater economic security , who have more free time and also more resources to access leisure and entertainment.

The lower classes do not. So there is an entry division by the [00:12:00] money, for access, who can access the first, free time. But not everyone who has free time has access to leisure, entertainment and tourist services. So, there is a double division here, a class division, Now, looking at it this way, we see that ecosystems are not simply used by everyone in an equal way, but that some have more access and others do not. Or some have more access. gradually and others much more sporadically, which is that class division.

But the other division that is very important is consumption, that is, converting , that is why I call it bio-commodification , in the sense of converting ecosystems into a commodity to sell, that commodity you cannot take with you like, like others , that are produced by human hand, but ecosystems that are put to [00:13:00] service, but also to a new control. And this is important, a new control, of the ecosystem.

Generally, almost all ecosystems in the world have a management system that until very recently had a community management system . This management system is not just that people share natural resources, but that there are rules for sharing natural resources. The Nobel Prize winner in economics Ostrom curiously discovered, something that people and communities have actually been doing for hundreds of years. In other words, for them it is not a discovery, it is their way of life. That is, that there is a system of self-regulation where, for example, in order not to exhaust natural resources, there are rotation systems. There are sanctions for those who violate the rotation system, limits, for example, for [00:14:00] fishing, limits to make, to put cows to pasture, limits for, for example, in some species that know that if too much is collected, it can cause the collapse of a bank, for example, of mollusks.

In short, there is a lot of knowledge from the people, where they know how not to exhaust natural resources. It does not mean that all the people have self-regulation systems that they call common. But it does mean that many people do have them. When a tourist enclave arrives, this type of relationship changes and the management of it changes, it may be a mangrove swamp , it may be a lagoon, it may be a river, it may be a forest . And it is oriented towards the sale of services, sometimes changing in a harmonious way with that community regulation, sometimes completely displacing that community regulation and turning them into [00:15:00] tourism services workers.

These two changes should speak to us from both a class perspective and a community perspective, of two very violent ways of disorganizing and reorganizing, but with the basis of wanting to generate profits for both workers and communities. And along with the communities, the local ecosystems.

Chris: Wow. Well, yes, immediately speaking of the community issue. And those changes have made me think of the milpa and also how, that was very much a part of people's daily life. And also thinking about the milpa, that is, that agricultural system that exists in Mesoamerica. I have also thought about that thing about certain ancient Mesoamerican cities or towns that, were [00:16:00] supposedly abandoned, but thinking about the milpa, the need to put limits on the use of the land that also perhaps had a place in the context of a society, or at least a city, or at least an entire town as it is time to leave this place in its time.

But that is something that has come up a lot in the podcast over the years, with this question of removing boundaries, that tourism is an industry that destroys boundaries.

And so, you mentioned Marx at the beginning and we also mentioned a little bit about ecology and you've written a little bit about ecological Marxism. And I wanted to ask you if ecological Marxism is just a way of measuring and defining what [00:17:00] is happening or also how to react, respond, evaluate perhaps.

Cesar: I would say that ecological Marxism is just one of the traditions of the new environmentalisms, and of the theoretical traditions. Because, we should separate the biocultural knowledge of the peoples. That is, the way they actually are, knowledge about flora, fauna, soils, climate, production, consumption and waste that communities have. Again, not all communities have a self-regulated system around all this. Some do maintain them. Others have, maintain parts and others have lost a good part of their organization, and then they begin to produce what I call a metabolic disturbance. "Disturbance" comes from systems theory, for example, those who are dedicated to [00:18:00] that explained to us, especially for example, in aquifer ecosystems that, for example, when there is a biochemical change in the waters, for example a contaminant is entering quickly, well obviously, because in a very large lagoon, well, that contaminant is not noticeable, right? That is, it seems like it can dilute it. There is so much water that it dilutes the contaminants, right?

But if there is suddenly a very important spill of a contaminant. For example, it can change color or it can change suddenly. That capacity for illusion or resistance, for example, to maintain its color or maintain certain shapes, is what has been called resilience. And, the abrupt transformation would be a disturbance in the system as such. So, thinking about Marx and thinking about this systems theory, I thought [00:19:00] that the idea that we have this link, of social organization with nature, I thought about the idea that metabolic disturbance could be an abrupt change in the relationship with the ecosystem.

It is not necessarily because the land is taken from people, for example, I think that the farmers themselves, in order to compete in the market, since the market is monopolized by large corporations that produce very quickly, have to start buying technological packages, basically agrotoxins, to produce faster. So, even if they had a more or less sustainable, more or less harmonious relationship with their cornfield, by introducing agrotoxins, they begin to change their metabolic relationship with the ecosystem, although the corporation has not come to force them, but they make the decision because each time their product in the market is worth [00:20:00] less .

So they have to produce more. That disturbance, for example, and those, are also organized around certain knowledge. So, on the one hand, we have the knowledge of the communities that can be lost, that can be destabilized or that can change, as I said, and that is why I was referring to the community metabolic disturbance, it changes abruptly and can be very damaging to their ecosystems.

And on the other hand, we have a series of scientific knowledge and a series of theoretical knowledge that could be grouped into several trends, and one of them is ecological Marxism. There are a number of authors who have returned to reading Marx thinking that he can tell us in ecological terms and in the published texts, those that Marx did want to publish, there is an enormous number of references and a vision [00:21:00] that, contrary to what had been thought until recently, Marx is always thinking about nature.

But there is also a package of notes and research notebooks that have yielded, so to speak, new discoveries. To date, not everything that Marx wrote has been published. Although many of these were notes, they were not texts like those known as The Grundrisse or Capital.

These notes are being reviewed by many experts, and one of them, for example, two of them, John Bellamy Foster, 20 years ago, and Kohei Saito from Japan, found in Marx's notes that he was increasingly concerned about how capitalist industry, the agricultural industry, was depleting the soil.

So, it turns out that Marx was studying precisely chemistry, he was studying all the geology of soils, the composition and he was [00:22:00] very interested in what capital was going to produce and he was convinced at the end of his life, only he no longer produced a text to publish, he was very concerned about the discovery that he himself had thought that capital exhausts the bases of its own renewal.

It exhausts, it is a form of social relationship, although we think it is only economic, but it is an economic-social relationship that exhausts natural resources. Although he did publish this, Marx literally says, capital undermines the two sources of wealth. He says, "work and nature." And that double vision seems very important to me when naming it in a series of academics who have maintained this research based on certain Marxist ideas and have continued to advance.

They are about twenty Marxist ecologists who are discussing climate change today [00:23:00] who are discussing the environmental crisis today based on criticism of capitalism.

Chris: Wow. Ye wow. So my next question comes a little bit from the ability to consider those crises that you mentioned, within other openings of ecology. So, in the second season of the podcast I interviewed Pedro UC from Muuch Xiin bal in the Yucatan, about the situation of the so-called Mayan train and also with a group of the Wixarika people who talked about the greenhouses that were invading their region, as well as about pepeyote poachers, spiritual tourists were also causing damage to their lands, to their [00:24:00] relationships, not only economic, but also cultural. Maybe we can say spiritual. So, in this context, there are often two types of extractivism at the same time, the transformation of the land into a commodity and the attempt to acquire knowledge or spiritual power.

Cesar: So, I'm curious to know how you see these two worlds interacting both in Mexico and in other parts of Latin America, in this question of ecology also including the culture and religion of the people.

Yes, well, capital, as a social relationship, tends to commodify everything. We must remember, for example, I also always give as an example that women's makeup was actually, that it was feminized, the makeup of the people. It was beautification. All [00:25:00] cultures, all, all tribal civilizations up to great agricultural civilizations, already based on rivers, the great cultures in all times, we tend to beautify our bodies. We tend to decorate them in very different ways, in very different forms. Generally linked to the local cultural process. Capital has turned it into a commodity.

Cesar: That is to say, instead, if we think about it, before, all cultures, the tribal ones, could beautify their bodies, their skin, in many ways, they knew the technique to do it, use the materials to do it, or forge their own jewelry, and make their own clothes. Everything I just said, capital has turned into a commodity and stripped, so to speak, of knowledge.

We don't know today, people [00:26:00] who live in urban, modern, fully capitalized cities. We don't know how to do those things. We don't know how to beautify our bodies, or we know how to do it from the materials and goods that an industry sells us. So capital uses our needs and the need to beautify ourselves is not a frivolity. What happens is that it becomes a frivolity when goods are mass produced that are actually for beautification and bring with them a marketing of beautification of certain forms, in addition to hegemonic beauty.

So why do I say this example that seems very far from our conversation about nature, because capital can turn into service and therefore into a service that generates profits in practically any way [00:27:00] ethno-cultural, as they call it, any form of ethno-tourism, any form of eco-tourism, that is, generating profits from services of getting to know each other, having fun, leisure, even social contact, which they call social contact tourism. That is to say, it seeks an alternative experience that can be great fun, these machines that lift you up with water in the sea with a technician who accompanies you, or simply scooters that take you to places in wooded areas, that is to say, it can be any type of tourist service that is accompanied, accompanying you to live an experience in an ecosystem that is generally outside your city.

But also, this division, city and rural or city, tourist enclave or city [00:28:00] also a place of Eden, a paradise. This division has been produced, because of the concentration of capital in the cities and because of the concentration of work in the city. So, what this international division of labor that produces cities that work and places of rest and, therefore, workers who have to take care of you for your rest, well, it is logical that it is an international division that also makes there be countries that produce tourist services and countries that consume or cities that consume tourist services as well. Why do I also propose this enormous division? Because, the extraction of natural resources is very well known from the south to the north and it is effectively also related to tourist enclaves and the tourist infrastructure that is built. [00:29:00]

The tastes and needs of the elite middle-class and upper-class tourist require certain comforts that are not necessarily produced in the local ecosystem. So you have to bring, so to speak, if the elite tourist wants strawberries and then a bread with avocado, well, you have to bring strawberries from the other side of the country, even the world, and you have to bring avocado, which is ...

Why do I say these two? Because the first is produced under certain forms of exploitation of day laborers, for example, in northern Mexico. And they have to be taken to the peninsula. If we were to say on the Mayan train in a place that could apparently be eco-friendly, that is, it could produce, try to produce organically, not waste water or waste [00:30:00] less, or have certain services in their locality. Well, you have to bring strawberries from the other side, you have to bring avocados, which have a high water consumption. This is very important, there are certain species, as you said, there are no limits. There are no limits. If the tourist wants avocado, you have to have avocados and, therefore, you have to bring them from Michoacán, which also depletes the aquifers and expands as a monoculture.

There is this extractive relationship, not only from the south to the north, but also from the cities, versus the rural and tourist enclaves versus ecosystems in general. So these types of relationships are not sustainable. This extractivism, then, is not only, it can be cultural, obviously, that turns into merchandise, social relations, cultural relations that in general were not, did not enter the sphere of merchandise. That is why I also call it bio-commodification, because it is to include in [00:31:00] spheres of natural goods, spheres of ecosystems to the area of commodities, when before they were not, it is generally water that we think of . Before it was not a commodity. Now, increasingly, there is an attempt to make it one.

So, in this double sense of extractivism, it seems very important to me to clarify that tourist enclaves are also a form of extraction and depeasantization. Again, it creates a metabolic disturbance because the peasant who cannot access With the sale of his own product, he sees working in a hotel as an option, he sees abandoning the land as an option. And if the land is abandoned, then it can be rented for other things, or it can be deforested or urbanized if the farmer ... the best way to take care of the land is for the farmer to continue cultivating it.

But if [00:32:00] If you abandon it, anything can happen to the land. And we end up with a tourist enclave that can even have, I insist, a green perspective, saying that it is producing, that it has organic food or that it recycles water or that it does this type of actions that are obviously very positive, but compared to the metabolic change that it will produce in the farmers of the local ecosystem, abandoning the land and considering the enormous consumption that it has to bring from other parts of the country and the world for elite consumption, it seems that recycling water, not giving out straws or having a vegetarian diet in a hotel is insufficient .

That is, the disruption of the ecosystem and the extraction of natural resources from other places and the most important, water, [00:33:00] They are simply not mitigatable changes, they are not changes that can be compared with the small actions of ecological care that, of course, we all have to do, and we all have to educate ourselves in them, but at a structural level, of course, the tourist enclave is more destructive, a corporate enclave, an industrial enclave, an enclave of oligopolies, an enclave of mass consumption . Than these actions that you mention.

Chris: Thanks Cesar. Well, one thing that I only understood when I started working in the tourism industry was that every place I visited in the world before, even if I stayed a week, two weeks, a month or maybe three, six months, [00:34:00] I didn't stay long enough to understand the consequences of my movements there.

And so I think that this is very strong, that tourists have a responsibility that is totally, not totally, but almost totally removed from their ability to know it, to understand it, and, but when we talk about the rural population, who not only has certain economic forces, but I also feel that they have cultural desires, that is, like that American dream, which is now a global dream and that.

But for example, I was thinking about the towns in Oaxaca that do ecotourism, and ecotourism based on the municipality, on the assembly, as a way for people to stay in the town, generate income and perhaps also enter [00:35:00] with a bond and relationship of hospitality that goes beyond the tourist industry, for example, but also the mere presence of the foreigner in a place like that changes what existed in the town before. And in many towns, if there are people who say, well no, "it was a mistake." And there are others who say "no, I mean, it's feeding the town very well." So I wanted to ask you what you think about these, not necessarily contradictions, but different reflections and considerations.

Cesar: I think it is an alternative, indeed, when it comes as a project from the people themselves. And when the people have an organizational process that allows them to face the challenge of a community enterprise, of a community cooperative [00:36:00] community services and effectively establish the rules and forms of regulation for visiting, be it a community, an ecosystem, etc.

That is to say, I believe that when it comes from below, it is a real alternative, although I would say that it is essential to combine it with peasant forms of production which, I insist, are deteriorating and all ecosystems are deteriorating.

So, I think it would be a bottom-up approach. The problem is when it is imposed from above. Like in the Mayan train, where areas are opened up for tourism, where formally these elements are going to be taken care of, discursively these elements are going to be taken care of, but we have seen how the capture, for example, of the beaches, how the capture and spatialization of businesses with great [00:37:00] investment, for example, they monopolize trade, they monopolize access to beaches, they even monopolize the form of urbanization. They are not combinable, it's just that there are people who think that community can be harmoniously combined with large investments from big capital and with large corporate tourist capital.

But they have different logics. It's not that one is good and one is bad, it's not a question of morality, it's a question of social organization . If the tourist agrees, for example, to adapt to a diet that locally has a smaller ecological footprint, and also the limits can be programmed, as you also pointed out, regarding the capacity of the visit and the load that the visit can have on the specific place, it can perfectly be an alternative, although [00:38:00] It must be said that if we change the scale, it is not viable for a billion Europeans and North Americans to travel all over the world. They cannot produce so much CO2, that is, they cannot, so we have and until now there is no global discussion about this.

There is a discussion about jets owned by billionaires because a flight is very polluting, but jets are even more so because they are dedicated to comfort and to trips that are not essential, but luxury. So, if we think about the fact that jet flights should not only be regulated, but prohibited, and the gigantic explosion of airlines at an international level, even commercial flights and not private flights, it is unsustainable.

The airline industry says they only produce 1% [00:39:00] of the world's CO2. Yes, but each industry says that it is not that I only produce 2% or 5%, or 0.5%. Of course, then, in the end, no one is responsible for the production of CO2, because everyone can say I am so irresponsible that I should not be regulated, but it is not viable.

So, I think we should think about local tourism , shortening the commodity chains for producing tourist services. That is, thinking that national, co-national and international services have to be regulated .

Well, even though you may know more, I know much more about community tourism and community impacts and less about the impact of neighborhood and urban tourism that several European cities are experiencing and that is practically out of control in Paris, in Barcelona, it is out of control and together with Airbnb or others [00:40:00] platforms that allow the mass arrival of people or even permanent visits of foreigners that has nothing to do with their nationality, is not a xenophobic thing, but in the sense of displacement that foreigners do not want, for example, in Mexico, it is not that they are bad, it is not that they are, that they are foreigners. I insist, it is not a racial or xenophobic issue, but in the sense that foreigners in Mexico, in Mexico City, not in a community, not in an ecosystem yet, protected in an ecosystem, let's say more harmonious than that of the city, people are being displaced because the monetary capacity, the ability to earn, the ability to class displaces housing in neighborhoods like Roma and Condesa.

So, that's why it's very important that when we think about alternatives, I think we have to look at all of these [00:41:00] scales, for the community of course, I think yes, I insist yes, if it comes from the community as a community project. I think it is a project that can strengthen the process, can continue to maintain certain environmental balances and can be an alternative economic source of income for the communities.

If we look at it as an international structure, community tourism falls far short of the capacity that the last 40 years of neoliberalism have created in infrastructure . That is to say, if today you can travel anywhere in the world at a lower price, it is because there are more airlines, it is because there is more infrastructure, because there is more competition, because there are credit packages.

That is to say, there is a mega industry, because there is a huge marketing to sell you flights, to offer you, fly now and pay later. That gigantic global industry is unsustainable, so many people cannot travel around the world, we are going to [00:42:00] bursting at the seams. Well, we are bursting at the seams, we are bursting at the seams of the world with international tourist mobility that is becoming more and more uncontrollable, and because of the number. Again, tourists are not bad. The problem is the huge number of tourists who, in fact, by sheer numbers, exhaust the peyote in the north, leave the beaches dirty, consume more water, require more electricity.

That is to say, the industry in its international corporate and industrial form is unsustainable. I think we need to think about how we could reduce the impacts towards community tourism controlled by the people themselves. And that is where I think that is the alternative.

Chris: Mm. Mm. Thank you, Cesar. And so, from what I've read, it seems that you are very involved in the question of autonomy and the emancipation of peoples. [00:43:00] I would also like to ask you how you think that this understanding can help urban people to build community, communality and solidarity.

It is something that we think a lot about, like, well, they have the answer over there because they have land and territory, but we, as tenants, etc., who perhaps will never in our lives have a house or territory or land.

Cesar: Well, first of all, my interest is because, in general, until 1989 there were 200 years of a promise, led by the political left. And when I refer to the political left, I am not referring only to the parties, I am referring to a project of overcoming the organization of society that promised freedom, equality, fraternity.

The process by which the projects and horizons of transformation have deteriorated is very serious, that is, it has been thought, today we are practically resigned, although there are millions who are not, but it seems that if that is the spirit, the mood, as young people would say, the mood of the times is that there is no alternative, as Fredric Jameson or Žižek have suggested, it is easier to think about the end of humanity than the end of capitalism, or the end of the world than the end of capitalism. So, I am very concerned about thinking about alternatives, and effectively thinking about political horizons, I insist political in a broad sense, not partisan political, but political as the capacity that we have, even as a species to agree and have horizons of what we want to do, what life we want, what life, what life project we also desire and can [00:45:00] to build. In fact, that is what defines us as a species, that we give ourselves our own organizational form. It is the species that can have one form in China and another form in the Andes, and another form in North America, and another form in South Africa.

Cesar: That is to say, different forms of social organization that reproduce life, and reproducing life can be done in a very despotic way or in a much more free way. And in that sense, I have been involved, if I have a lot of time, maybe a decade and a half or two decades, thinking about what the emancipatory elements have been in those projects. And in reality, what we think was socialism or communism, which were actually authoritarian experiences of single parties and elites, had in their germ other ideas, which were that the power of the workers, the self-management of the workers was the [00:46:00] new form of social organization. That is to say, that the workers made the decisions about production.

What I see in Latin America, where there is a less important or less large labor movement, as was the labor movement in Europe, also in the United States, is that the original non-capitalist forms also allow life to be reproduced in other ways, in community ways and in other ways.

These two elements in Northern Europe, the power of workers to control reproduction, indigenous peoples controlling their own local ecosystems. I think they teach us lessons about other forms of social organization. I just published a text, a book, that talks about the production of community in cities. It is a research in Mexico City, where a massive movement … I mean, we generally also think of community as about fifty people, very few.

These are thousands of families who have been able to form, build urban communities from nothing. No, they were not indigenous peoples who moved to the city, to the periphery as has happened, for example, in El Alto in Bolivia, but rather working classes, with very low incomes, who in their search for housing found that they not only wanted housing, but also wanted to improve and dignify their own lives. I insist, very precarious working classes. And what they have built, Raúl Zibechi, one of the best-known journalists and intellectuals in Latin America because he has been in practically all the social movements of the continent. From the southern cone to Mexico, from the Araucanía of Chile to the Lacandon Jungle in Mexico. We took him [00:48:00] to visit this experience here in Mexico City and he said this is the most important urban autonomy in Latin America. And I conclude by saying on the subject of autonomy. So I am very interested in not studying them from a social science perspective as an object of study, just to know how they work, but because by understanding how they work, they give alternatives to those of us who are not in those communities.

So, I am very interested in learning about these experiences, tracing them historically, studying them and understanding them, and comprehending them and learning from them. In other words, what I want is for the learning that these communities have produced to be understood by others who do not live in a community. And, finally, a learning that comes from a notion that has emerged after the fall of the Berlin Wall has been precisely autonomy, because in the face of the authoritarian experiences of Eastern Europe, it seems that [00:49:00] no one wants to repeat an experience that, although we reject the capitalist and liberal forms of politics, we do not want an authoritarian and centralizing experience either, and much less a totalitarian one of a single party that decides everything.

What we have found both theoretically and in these empirical cases is that autonomy, the ability to give oneself one's own laws, that means autonomy, but beyond the laws, it is governing oneself. In reality it is emancipation. Emancipation means getting rid of the hand of the lord. What lord? It was the feudal lord, that's more or less how the word was created from, or from the slave a very long time ago. Getting rid of the hand of the master or the feudal lord, that is to say that no one else should command you.

That is also living in freedom, but communities live collectively and to emancipate themselves they need to remove themselves [00:50:00] from a hand that is invisible, the hand of the market, the hand of capital. So, how do we emancipate ourselves collectively and achieve autonomy? Governing ourselves also means putting a stop to the decisions of states that generally in Latin America have had a colonial perspective in relation to indigenous peoples, or neocolonial, or also internal colonialism, as Don Pablo González Casanova said.

Now, finally, autonomy, then, I consider it, is the central element, even beyond economic egalitarianism. They are two different projects. That is to say, when people manage to dignify their lives, I think it is very positive, I think that all of us who have an emancipatory critical perspective or even a leftist one, want people in general to live with dignity, not with great luxuries, but also not with enormous precariousness where sometimes, well, many communities live in enormous precariousness. [00:51:00] But what is more interesting is that it is the people themselves who decide how to live and decide what poverty is and what dignity is, and that it is not decided by the state, nor by the academy, nor by scholars of egalitarianism.

What do their lives need, and when people manage to control their lives, they teach us another form of freedom. In that sense, I think that these experiences are also brought together precisely to continue the discussion of how societies that no longer have community organization, that do not have an organizational framework even in the factory, could emulate, replicate some of the practices, some of the organizational forms to live effectively and regulate society in one way or another, a freer way, a more egalitarian way.

That is also a bit of the work that I have been doing, which has to do with [00:52:00] this concern of, I believe that there are many, many alternatives, but there is no longer an alternative that calls for everyone, which was what mobilized many, many, millions and millions of people in the 20th century who even gave their lives to make a change, a change that they called revolutionary. And it seems to me that today, despite the fact that we have many more alternative grassroots experiences of the people, of agroecological alternatives, of communicational alternatives, of forms of regulation, of new ways of establishing gender relations, we have multiple alternatives and multiple theories.

Today it seems that no, we cannot, articulate them, let's say, in a common project, and perhaps we need some common elements, not to create a society in which everything is equal, but on the contrary, as they said, as the Zapatistas say, a world where many worlds fit, many alternatives, but [00:53:00] thought of in many forms also of communal, egalitarian, free and emancipated social relations.

Chris: Mm. Yeah, so through that comment about autonomy and dignity, and the diversity that can come when we have that freedom, I wanted to ask you if you could imagine a future without tourism as we're criticizing today, maybe a type of leisure, or travel, or interculturality, that you could imagine. What do you put forward in the conversation for people before we end here?

Cease: Yes, first, on this tourism issue, I think we should think that the world is ending as we knew it. There are no longer conditions, we [00:54:00] We are heading for a possible systemic collapse if we continue to consume energy and matter at the rate we are doing. And when I say at the rate we are doing it, I recognize that the poor consume less water, for example, there is a study of water families in Mexico City where some families, the poorest in the city, consume only about 50 liters, and instead, the richest or wealthiest consume more than 1000 liters a day, just one family.

So, it seems very important to me to understand these class differences linked to nature and, on the other hand, to think that all of us who have lived, as a businessman said In a documentary, he says, we are flying to a moment in history where it seems very nice because we have had a series of comforts that no civilization could have.

That is, knowing the [00:55:00] the entire planet because we have that opportunity when we have a little money, even if we are not rich, we have the capacity, due to the infrastructure, the productive forces, because there is indeed a global network that allows it. But this is unsustainable, as are many luxuries.

It is very sad to have to think that this tourist luxury must end. Perhaps in a society where we could decide what we would prefer. Well, of course, in my case, I would also decide to visit many places and reduce my ecological footprint in many other things that are not essential, but that would only be possible, that is, to maintain tourism. Not in the corporate form that we have today. If we could reduce our consumption, for example, in clothing, our electricity consumption, our consumption, of course, of carbon, among others, many other pollutants and consumption of matter and energy.

So I think that [00:56:00] We should think about the new society that needs to be built, and sometimes people see you as crazy, as if to say, but how, that's not going to happen. Capitalism is working perfectly. But we are already in a moment of transition, we are, what happened with the hurricane last year here in Mexico, in Acapulco, what happened in Valencia , are only the first signs of many more that are not known. These were human tragedies and therefore, they were known more. But we are already living a transition in terms of the earth system, we don't know what is going to happen and we must prepare for that. So, I think we should think more about what an alternative society would be like where community tourism and small-scale tourism, and controlled tourism, or rather, regulated with a low ecological footprint impact were possible, thinking about its entire chain of goods, its entire chain of services. [00:57:00]

I think that is the horizon we should set for tourism. And in the meantime, we should continue to support people's alternatives to control their ecosystems when they effectively decide to open them to tourism, in any of its forms.

And on the other hand, and to close effectively, there are dozens of lessons from what I have approached, and I have approached as well, precisely because I have seen not only hope, but alternative forms of social relationships.

I say some, you can create an urban community. The popular classes have their own political capacity that has to be developed, it is not automatic, it is not there because of its popular essence, but it can generate its own political forms in a long learning process that allows us to understand that the community is also a way of exercising [00:58:00] power, a form that also regulates selfish positions, attitudes and positions that take advantage of others, and represses them, suppresses them, but also allows the production of commons, of common benefit and the production of new social relations that satisfy everyone, because they are not only material relations, but also emotional relations, affective ties, satisfaction from serving others . That is to say, the community can be reproduced in cities, unlike our notion that it can only occur in rural communities, or that community can only be produced in rural areas.

These elements are very important. On the other hand, the enormous biocultural wealth of the people, despite the ecosystem deterioration, despite the advance of urbanization, despite the deterioration of [00:59:00] peasants as a social class, despite climate change, the people continue to resist. They have already found wonderful ways to keep their communities cohesive, to reorganize, to have their own political-community horizons, their autonomy and the biocultural knowledge that they hold, which I am now precisely investigating, as I was saying, in the case of Texcoco, which is to learn from their relationship with other species, with algae, the algae of Lake Texcoco, with birds, with soils, soils that were not fertile or that have a differential production in corn, in the other species that they cultivate, their own knowledge of cultivation, the combination of cultivation, their relationship with the land.

They talk about a, let's say, a civilizing cluster of them, but of all humanity. [01:00:00] Well, it gives us hope because that knowledge, I always tell my students, imagine how long it took for us to be able to learn which mushroom was edible, which was hallucinogenic and which was not edible. It is a vital learning, not only for mushrooms, but we can reproduce it in all of them, corn, fruits, vegetables, medicinal herbs.

It is knowledge that belongs to no one. It is common. It is open to everyone and with it we can survive, knowledge about seeds, about water, about local ecosystems. And that, the people are also sharing that knowledge.

I think that with the idea that community can be produced in the city and that biocultural knowledge is not only from local peoples, but is the knowledge of the great human civilizations, I think that we have two tools to confront the enormous danger that we have today in the face of climate change and other environmental problems that we have today, especially the sixth mass extinction of species, the sedification of the oceans, among other elements. But we have two large accumulations of human knowledge that is millennia old, and that can allow us to survive here and now, and into the future, which is going to be difficult, but the organization of the peoples, the organization of the popular classes, the alternatives that are already installed in at least those that I know of throughout Latin America, show that we can have viable alternatives, freer, more horizontal, more democratic, more emancipatory .

Chris: Mmm, wow. Well thank you, thank you, Cesar, for those two mushrooms, the edible stuff and what's happening today and also the hallucinogenic stuff, what we can imagine in [01:02:00] other worlds. It was a great pleasure and honor to spend this time with you. So, I'd like to thank you, on behalf of our listeners as well.

And before I finish, I just wanted to ask you if there is any way for listeners to follow your work, get in touch with you, read your books, etc.

Cesar: Yes, the easiest way is, I use X. . What a horrible name, but it's @cesarpinedar, with an r at the end, @cesarpinedar. And also on my page, enriquepineda.info, that's actually where all my texts are.

I post a lot on social media, especially on X. I still call it Twitter because the verb Tweet is better. How do you say now with X when you post something? So, I guess, but it's more boring. Anyway, I invite you to thank you very much for your questions and this conversation and this [01:03:00] possibility to spread a little bit of what we know and a little bit of our knowledge, which is also a knowledge among many others, all very diverse and legitimate and valid.

So, thank you too for this conversation.

Chris: Thanks, Cesar.

S5 #10 | The Samaritan and the Corruption w/ David Cayley (CBC Ideas)

Chris Christou — Thu, 17 Oct 2024 15:09:56 GMT

On this episode of the pod, my guest is David Cayley, a Toronto-based Canadian writer and broadcaster. For more than thirty years (1981-2012) he made radio documentaries for CBC Radio One’s program Ideas, which premiered in 1965 under the title The Best Ideas You’ll Hear Tonight.

In 1966, at the age of twenty, Cayley joined the Canadian University Service Overseas (CUSO), one of the many volunteer organizations that sprang up in the 1960’s to promote international development. Two years later, back in Canada, he began to associate with a group of returned volunteers whose experiences had made them, like himself, increasingly quizzical about the idea of development. In 1968 in Chicago, he heard a lecture given by Ivan Illich and in 1970 he and others brought Illich to Toronto for a teach-in called “Crisis in Development.” This was the beginning of their long relationship: eighteen years later Cayley invited Illich to do a series of interviews for CBC Radio’s Ideas.

Cayley is the author of Ivan Illich: An Intellectual Journey (2022), Ideas on the Nature of Science (2009), The Rivers North of the Future: The Testament of Ivan Illich (2004), Puppet Uprising (2003),The Expanding Prison: The Crisis in Crime and Punishment and the Search for Alternatives (1998), George Grant in Conversation (1995), Northrop Frye in Conversation (1992), Ivan Illich in Conversation (1992), and The Age of Ecology (1990).

Subscribe now

Show Notes:

The Early Years with Ivan Illich

The Good Samaritan Story

Falling out of a Homeworld

The Corruption of the Best is the Worst (Corruptio Optimi Pessima)

How Hospitality Becomes Hostility

How to Live in Contradiction

Rediscovering the Future

The Pilgrimage of Surprise

Friendship with the Other

Homework:

Ivan Illich: An Intellectual Journey (Penn State Press) - Paperback Now Available!

David Cayley’s Website

The Rivers North of the Future (House of Anansi Press)

Ivan Illich | The Corruption of Christianity: Corruptio Optimi Pessima (2000)

Charles Taylor: A Secular Age

Transcript:

Chris: [00:00:00] Welcome, David, to the End of Tourism Podcast. It's a pleasure to finally meet you.

David: Likewise. Thank you.

Chris: I'm very grateful to have you joining me today. And I'm curious if you could offer our listeners a little glimpse into where you find yourself today and what the world looks like for you through the lenses of David Cayley.

David: Gray and wet. In Toronto, we've had a mild winter so far, although we did just have some real winter for a couple of weeks. So, I'm at my desk in my house in downtown Toronto. Hmm.

Chris: Hmm. Thank you so much for joining us, David. You know, I came to your work quite long ago.

First through the book, The Rivers North of the Future, The Testament of Ivan Illich. And then through your long standing tenure as the host of CBC Ideas in Canada. I've also just finished reading your newest book, Ivan Illich, An Intellectual Journey. For me, which has been a clear and comprehensive homage [00:01:00] to that man's work.

And so, from what I understand from the reading, you were a friend of Illich's as well as the late Gustavo Esteva, a mutual friend of ours, who I interviewed for the podcast shortly before his death in 2021. Now, since friendship is one of the themes I'd like to approach with you today, I'm wondering if you could tell us about how you met these men and what led you to writing a biography of the former, of Ivan.

David: Well, let me answer about Ivan first. I met him as a very young man. I had spent two years living in northern Borneo, eastern Malaysia, the Malaysian state of Sarawak. As part of an organization called the Canadian University Service Overseas, which many people recognize only when it's identified with the Peace Corps. It was a similar initiative or the VSO, very much of the time.

And When I returned to [00:02:00] Toronto in 1968, one of the first things I saw was an essay of Ivan's. It usually circulates under the name he never gave it, which is, "To Hell With Good Intentions." A talk he had given in Chicago to some young volunteers in a Catholic organization bound for Mexico.

And it made sense to me in a radical and surprising way. So, I would say it began there. I went to CDOC the following year. The year after that we brought Ivan to Toronto for a teach in, in the fashion of the time, and he was then an immense celebrity, so we turned people away from a 600 seat theater that night when he lectured in Toronto.

I kept in touch subsequently through reading mainly and we didn't meet again until the later 1980s when he came to Toronto.[00:03:00]

He was then working on, in the history of literacy, had just published a book called ABC: the Alphabetization of the Western Mind. And that's where we became more closely connected. I went later that year to State College, Pennsylvania, where he was teaching at Penn State, and recorded a long interview, radically long.

And made a five-hour Ideas series, but by a happy chance, I had not thought of this, his friend Lee Hoinacki asked for the raw tapes, transcribed them, and eventually that became a published book. And marked an epoch in Ivan's reception, as well as in my life because a lot of people responded to the spoken or transcribed Illich in a way that they didn't seem to be able to respond to his writing, which was scholastically condensed, let's [00:04:00] say.

I always found it extremely congenial and I would even say witty in the deep sense of wit. But I think a lot of people, you know, found it hard and so the spoken Illich... people came to him, even old friends and said, you know, "we understand you better now." So, the following year he came to Toronto and stayed with us and, you know, a friendship blossomed and also a funny relationship where I kept trying to get him to express himself more on the theme of the book you mentioned, The Rivers North of the Future, which is his feeling that modernity, in the big sense of modernity can be best understood as perversionism. A word that he used, because he liked strong words, but it can be a frightening word.

"Corruption" also has its difficulties, [00:05:00] but sometimes he said "a turning inside out," which I like very much, or "a turning upside down" of the gospel. So, when the world has its way with the life, death and resurrection and teaching of Jesus Christ which inevitably becomes an institution when the world has its way with that.

The way leads to where we are. That was his radical thought. And a novel thought, according to the philosopher Charles Taylor, a Canadian philosopher, who was kind enough to write a preface to that book when it was published, and I think very much aided its reception, because people knew who Charles Taylor was, and by then, they had kind of forgotten who Ivan Illich was.

To give an example of that, when he died, the New York [00:06:00] Times obituary was headlined "Priest turned philosopher appealed to baby boomers in the 60s." This is yesterday's man, in other words, right? This is somebody who used to be important. So, I just kept at him about it, and eventually it became clear he was never going to write that book for a whole variety of reasons, which I won't go into now.

But he did allow me to come to Cuernavaca, where he was living, and to do another very long set of interviews, which produced that book, The Rivers North of the Future. So that's the history in brief. The very last part of that story is that The Rivers North of the Future and the radio series that it was based on identifies themes that I find to be quite explosive. And so, in a certain way, the book you mentioned, Ivan Illich: An Intellectual Journey, [00:07:00] was destined from the moment that I recorded those conversations.

Chris: Hmm, yeah, thank you, David. So much of what you said right there ends up being the basis for most of my questions today, especially around the corruption or the perversion what perhaps iatrogenesis also termed as iatrogenesis But much of what I've also come to ask today, stems and revolves around Illich's reading of the Good Samaritan story, so I'd like to start there, if that's alright.

And you know, for our listeners who aren't familiar either with the story or Illich's take on it, I've gathered some small excerpts from An Intellectual Journey so that they might be on the same page, so to speak.

So, from Ivan Illich, An Intellectual Journey:

"jesus tells the story after he has been asked how to, quote, 'inherit eternal life,' end quote, and has replied that one must love God and one's neighbor, [00:08:00] quote, 'as oneself,' but, quote, who is my neighbor? His interlocutor wants to know. Jesus answers with his tale of a man on his way from Jerusalem to Jericho, who is beset by robbers, beaten, and left, quote, 'half dead' by the side of the road.

Two men happen along, but, quote, 'pass by on the other side.' One is a priest and the other a Levite, a group that assisted the priests at the Great Temple, which, at that time, dominated the landscape of Jerusalem from the Temple Mount. Then, a Samaritan comes along. The Samaritans belonged to the estranged northern kingdom of Israel, and did not worship at the Temple.

Tension between the Samaritans and the Judeans in the Second Temple period gives the name a significance somewhere between 'foreigner' and 'enemy.' [00:09:00] In contemporary terms, he was, as Illich liked to say, 'a Palestinian.' The Samaritan has, quote, 'compassion' on the wounded one. He stops, binds his wounds, takes him to an inn where he can convalesce and promises the innkeeper that he will return to pay the bill.'

And so Jesus concludes by asking, 'Which of the three passers by was the neighbor?'

Illich claimed that this parable had been persistently misunderstood as a story about how one ought to act. He had surveyed sermons from the 3rd through 19th centuries, he said, 'and found a broad consensus that what was being proposed was a, quote, rule of conduct.' But this interpretation was, in fact, quote, 'the opposite of what Jesus wanted to point out.'

He had not been asked how to act toward a neighbor, but rather, 'who is my neighbor?' And he had replied, [00:10:00] scandalously, that it could be anyone at all. The choice of the Samaritan as the hero of the tale said, 'in effect, it is impossible to categorize who your neighbor might be.' The sense of being called to help the other is experienced intermittently and not as an unvarying obligation.

A quote, 'new kind of ought has been established,' Illich says, which is not related to a norm. It has a telos, it aims at somebody, some body, but not according to a rule.

And finally, The Master told them that who your neighbor is is not determined by your birth, by your condition, by the language which you speak, but by you.

You can recognize the other man who is out of bounds culturally, who is foreign linguistically, who, you can [00:11:00] say by providence or pure chance, is the one who lies somewhere along your road in the grass and create the supreme form of relatedness, which is not given by creation, but created by you. Any attempt to explain this 'ought,' as correspond, as, as corresponding to a norm, takes out the mysterious greatness from this free act.

And so, I think there are at least, at the very least, a few major points to take away from this little summary I've extracted. One, that the ability to choose one's neighbor, breaks the boundaries of ethnicity at the time, which were the bases for understanding one's identity and people and place in the world.

And two, that it creates a new foundation for hospitality and interculturality. And so I'm [00:12:00] curious, David, if you'd be willing to elaborate on these points as you understand them.

David: Well if you went a little farther on in that part of the book, you'd find an exposition of a German teacher and writer and professor, Claus Held, that I found very helpful in understanding what Ivan was saying. Held is a phenomenologist and a follower of Husserl, but he uses Husserl's term of the home world, right, that each of us has a home world. Mm-Hmm. Which is our ethnos within which our ethics apply.

It's a world in which we can be at home and in which we can somehow manage, right? There are a manageable number of people to whom we are obliged. We're not universally obliged. So, what was interesting about Held's analysis is then the condition in which the wounded [00:13:00] man lies is, he's fallen outside of any reference or any home world, right?

Nobody has to care for him. The priest and the Levite evidently don't care for him. They have more important things to do. The story doesn't tell you why. Is he ritually impure as one apparently dead is? What? You don't know. But they're on their way. They have other things to do. So the Samaritan is radically out of line, right?

He dares to enter this no man's land, this exceptional state in which the wounded man lies, and he does it on the strength of a feeling, right? A stirring inside him. A call. It's definitely a bodily experience. In Ivan's language of norms, it's not a norm. It's not a duty.

It's [00:14:00] not an obligation. It's not a thought. He's stirred. He is moved to do what he does and he cares for him and takes him to the inn and so on. So, the important thing in it for me is to understand the complementarity that's involved. Held says that if you try and develop a set of norms and ethics, however you want to say it, out of the Samaritan's Act, it ends up being radically corrosive, it ends up being radically corrosive damaging, destructive, disintegrating of the home world, right? If everybody's caring for everybody all the time universally, you're pretty soon in the maddening world, not pretty soon, but in a couple of millennia, in the maddening world we live in, right? Where people Can tell you with a straight face that their actions are intended to [00:15:00] save the planet and not experience a sense of grandiosity in saying that, right?

Not experiencing seemingly a madness, a sense of things on a scale that is not proper to any human being, and is bound, I think, to be destructive of their capacity to be related to what is at hand. So, I think what Ivan is saying in saying this is a new kind of ought, right, it's the whole thing of the corruption of the best is the worst in a nutshell because as soon as you think you can operationalize that, you can turn everyone into a Samaritan and You, you begin to destroy the home world, right?

You begin to destroy ethics. You begin to, or you transform ethics into something which is a contradiction of ethics. [00:16:00] So, there isn't an answer in it, in what he says. There's a complementarity, right? Hmm. There's the freedom to go outside, but if the freedom to go outside destroys any inside, then, what have you done?

Right? Hmm. You've created an unlivable world. A world of such unending, such unimaginable obligation, as one now lives in Toronto, you know, where I pass homeless people all the time. I can't care for all of them. So, I think it's also a way of understanding for those who contemplate it that you really have to pay attention.

What are you called to, right? What can you do? What is within your amplitude? What is urgent for you? Do that thing, right? Do not make yourself mad with [00:17:00] impossible charity. A charity you don't feel, you can't feel, you couldn't feel. Right? Take care of what's at hand, what you can take care of. What calls you.

Chris: I think this comes up quite a bit these days. Especially, in light of international conflicts, conflicts that arise far from people's homes and yet the demand of that 'ought' perhaps of having to be aware and having to have or having to feel some kind of responsibility for these things that are happening in other places that maybe, It's not that they don't have anything to do with us but that our ability to have any kind of recourse for what happens in those places is perhaps flippant, fleeting, and even that we're stretched to the point that we can't even tend and attend to what's happening in front of us in our neighborhoods.

And so, I'm curious as to how this came to be. You mentioned "the corruption" [00:18:00] and maybe we could just define that, if possible for our listeners this notion of "the corruption of the best is the worst." Would you be willing to do that? Do you think that that's an easy thing to do?

David: I've been trying for 30 years.

I can keep on trying. I really, I mean, that was the seed of everything. At the end of the interview we did in 1988, Ivan dropped that little bomb on me. And I was a diligent man, and I had prepared very carefully. I'd read everything he'd written and then at the very end of the interview, he says the whole history of the West can be summed up in the phrase, Corruptio Optimi Pessima.

He was quite fluent in Latin. The corruption of the best is the worst. And I thought, wait a minute, the whole history of the West? This is staggering. So, yes, I've been reflecting on it for a long time, but I think there are many ways to speak [00:19:00] about the incarnation, the idea that God is present and visible in the form of a human being, that God indeed is a human being in the person of Jesus Christ.

One way is to think of it as a kind of nuclear explosion of religion. Religion had always been the placation of a god. Right? A sacrifice of some kind made to placate a god. Now the god is present. It could be you. Jesus is explicit about it, and I think that is the most important thing for Iman in reading the gospel, is that God appears to us as one another.

Hmm. If you can put it, one another in the most general sense of that formula. So, that's explosive, right? I mean, religion, in a certain way, up to that moment, is society. It's the [00:20:00] integument of every society. It's the nature of the beast to be religious in the sense of having an understanding of how you're situated and in what order and with what foundation that order exists.

It's not an intellectual thing. It's just what people do. Karl Barth says religion is a yoke. So, it has in a certain way exploded or been exploded at that moment but it will of course be re instituted as a religion. What else could happen? And so Ivan says, and this probably slim New Testament warrant for this, but this was his story, that in the very earliest apostolic church. They were aware of this danger, right? That Christ must be shadowed by "Antichrist," a term that Ivan was brave enough to use. The word just has a [00:21:00] terrible, terrible history. I mean, the Protestants abused the Catholics with the name of Antichrist. Luther rages against the Pope as antichrist.

Hmm. And the word persists now as a kind of either as a sign of evangelical dogmatism, or maybe as a joke, right. When I was researching it, I came across a book called "How to Tell If Your Boyfriend Is The Antichrist." Mm-Hmm. It's kind of a jokey thing in a way, in so far as people know, but he dared to use it as to say the antichrist is simply the instituted Christ.

Right. It's not anything exotic. It's not anything theological. It's the inevitable worldly shadow of there being a Christ at all. And so that's, that's the beginning of the story. He, he claims that the church loses sight of this understanding, loses sight of the basic [00:22:00] complementarity or contradiction that's involved in the incarnation in the first place.

That this is something that can never be owned, something that can never be instituted, something that can only happen again and again and again within each one. So, but heaven can never finally come to earth except perhaps in a story about the end, right? The new heaven and the new earth, the new Jerusalem come down from heaven.

Fine. That's at the end, not now. So that's the gist of what he, what he said. He has a detailed analysis of the stages of that journey, right? So, within your theme of hospitality the beginnings of the church becoming a social worker in the decaying Roman Empire. And beginning to develop institutions of hospitality, [00:23:00] places for all the flotsam and jetsam of the decaying empire.

And then in a major way from the 11th through the 13th century, when the church institutes itself as a mini or proto state, right? With a new conception of law. Every element of our modernity prefigured in the medieval church and what it undertook, according to Ivan. This was all news to me when he first said it to me.

So yeah, the story goes on into our own time when I think one of the primary paradoxes or confusions that we face is that most of the people one meets and deals with believe themselves to be living after Christianity and indeed to great opponents of Christianity. I mean, nothing is more important in Canada now than to denounce residential schools, let's say, right? Which were [00:24:00] the schools for indigenous children, boarding schools, which were mainly staffed by the church, right?

So, the gothic figure of the nun, the sort of vulpine, sinister. That's the image of the church, right? So you have so many reasons to believe that you're after that. You've woken up, you're woke. And, and you see that now, right? So you don't In any way, see yourself as involved in this inversion of the gospel which has actually created your world and which is still, in so many ways, you.

So, leftists today, if I'm using the term leftists very, very broadly, "progressives," people sometimes say, "woke," people say. These are all in a certain way super Christians or hyper Christians, but absolutely unaware of themselves as Christians and any day you can read an analysis [00:25:00] which traces everything back to the Enlightenment.

Right? We need to re institute the Enlightenment. We've forgotten the Enlightenment. We have to get back to the, right? There's nothing before the Enlightenment. The Enlightenment is the over, that's an earlier overcoming of Christianity, right? So modernity is constantly overcoming Christianity. And constantly forgetting that it's Christian.

That these are the ways in which the Incarnation is working itself out. And one daren't say that it's bound to work itself out that way. Ivan will go as far as to say it's seemingly the will of God that it should work itself out that way. Right? Wow. So, that the Gospel will be preached to all nations as predicted at the end of the Gospels.

" Go therefore and preach to all nations," but it will not be preached in its explicit form. It will enter, as it were, through the [00:26:00] back door.

So that's a very big thought. But it's a saving thought in certain ways, because it does suggest a way of unwinding, or winding up, this string of finding out how this happened.

What is the nature of the misunderstanding that is being played out here? So.

Chris: Wow. Yeah, I mean, I, I feel like what you just said was a kind of nuclear bomb unto its own. I remember reading, for example, James Hillman in The Terrible Love of War, and at the very end he essentially listed all, not all, but many of the major characteristics of modern people and said if you act this way, you are Christian.

If you act this way, you are Christian. Essentially revealing that so much of modernity has these Christian roots. And, you know, you said in terms of this message and [00:27:00] corruption of the message going in through the back door. And I think that's what happens in terms of at least when we see institutions in the modern time, schools, hospitals, roads essentially modern institutions and lifestyles making their way into non modern places.

And I'm very fascinated in this in terms of hospitality. You said that the church, and I think you're quoting Illich there, but " the church is a social worker." But also how this hospitality shows up in the early church and maybe even how they feared about what could happen as a result to this question of the incarnation.

In your book it was just fascinating to read this that you said, or that you wrote, that "in the early years of Christianity it was customary in a Christian household to have an extra mattress, a bit of candle, and some dry bread in case the Lord Jesus should knock at the door in the form of a stranger without a roof, a form of behavior that was utterly [00:28:00] foreign to the cultures of the Roman Empire."

In which many Christians lived. And you write, "you took in your own, but not someone lost on the street." And then later "When the emperor Constantine recognized the church, Christian bishops gained the power to establish social corporations." And this is, I think, the idea of the social worker. The church is a social worker.

And you write that the first corporations they started were Samaritan corporations, which designated certain categories of people as preferred neighbors. For example, the bishops created special houses financed by the community that were charged with taking care of people without a home. Such care was no longer the free choice of the householder, it was the task of an institution.

The appearance of these xenodocheia? Literally, quote, 'houses for foreigners' signified the beginning of a change in the nature of the church."

And then of course you write and you mentioned this but "a gratuitous and truly [00:29:00] free choice of assisting the stranger has become an ideology and an idealism." Right. And so, this seems to be how the corruption of the Samaritan story, the corruption of breaking that threshold, or at least being able to cross it, comes to produce this incredible 'ought,' as you just kind of elaborated for us.

And then this notion of, that we can't see it anymore. That it becomes this thing in the past, as you said. In other words, history. Right? And so my next question is a question that comes to some degree from our late mutual friend Gustavo, Gustavo Esteva. And I'd just like to preface it by a small sentence from An Intellectual Journey where he wrote that,

"I think that limit, in Illich, is always linked to nemesis, or to what Jung calls [00:30:00] enantiodromia, his Greek word for the way in which any tendency, when pushed too far, can turn into its opposite.

And so, a long time ago, Illich once asked Gustavo if he could identify a word that could describe the era after development, or perhaps after development's death.

And Gustavo said, "hospitality." And so, much later, in a private conversation with Gustavo, in the context of tourism and gentrification, the kind that was beginning to sweep across Oaxaca at the time, some years ago, he told me that he considered

"the sale of one's people's radical or local hospitality as a kind of invitation to hostility in the place and within the ethnos that one lives in."

Another way of saying it might be that the subversion and absence of hospitality in a place breeds or can breed hostility.[00:31:00] I'm curious what you make of his comment in the light of limits, enantiodromia and the corruption that Illich talks about.

David: Well I'd like to say one thing which is the thought I was having while you, while you were speaking because at the very beginning I mentioned a reservation a discomfort with words like perversion and corruption. And the thought is that it's easy to understand Illich as doing critique, right? And it's easy then to moralize that critique, right?

And I think it's important that he's showing something that happens, right? And that I daren't say bound to happen, but is likely to happen because of who and what we are, that we will institutionalize, that we will make rules, that we will, right?

So, I think it's important to rescue Ivan from being read [00:32:00] moralistically, or that you're reading a scold here, right? Hmm. Right. I mean, and many social critics are or are read as scolds, right? And contemporary people are so used to being scolded that they, and scold themselves very regularly. So, I just wanted to say that to rescue Ivan from a certain kind of reading.

You're quoting Gustavo on the way in which the opening up of a culture touristically can lead to hostility, right? Right. And I think also commenting on the roots of the words are the same, right? "hostile," "hospice." They're drawing on the same, right?

That's right. It's how one treats the enemy, I think. Hmm. It's the hinge. Hmm. In all those words. What's the difference between hospitality and hostility?[00:33:00] So, I think that thought is profound and profoundly fruitful. So, I think Gustavo had many resources in expressing it.

I couldn't possibly express it any better. And I never answered you at the beginning how I met Gustavo, but on that occasion in 1988 when I was interviewing Illich, they were all gathered, a bunch of friends to write what was called The Development Dictionary, a series of essays trying to write an epilogue to the era of development.

So, Gustavo, as you know, was a charming man who spoke a peculiarly beautiful English in which he was fluent, but somehow, you could hear the cadence of Spanish through it without it even being strongly accented. So I rejoiced always in interviewing Gustavo, which I did several times because he was such a pleasure to listen to.

But anyway, I've digressed. Maybe I'm ducking your question. Do you want to re ask it or?

Chris: Sure. [00:34:00] Yeah, I suppose. You know although there were a number of essays that Gustavo wrote about hospitality that I don't believe have been published they focused quite a bit on this notion of individual people, but especially communities putting limits on their hospitality.

And of course, much of this hospitality today comes in the form of, or at least in the context of tourism, of international visitors. And that's kind of the infrastructure that's placed around it. And yet he was arguing essentially for limits on hospitality. And I think what he was seeing, although it hadn't quite come to fruition yet in Oaxaca, was that the commodification, the commercialization of one's local indigenous hospitality, once it's sold, or once it's only existing for the value or money of the foreigner, in a kind of customer service worldview, that it invites this deep [00:35:00] hostility. And so do these limits show up as well in Illich's work in terms of the stranger?

Right? Because so much of the Christian tradition is based in a universal fraternity, universal brotherhood.

David: I said that Ivan made sense to me in my youth, as a 22 year old man. So I've lived under his influence. I took him as a master, let's say and as a young person. And I would say that probably it's true that I've never gone anywhere that I haven't been invited to go.

So I, I could experience that, that I was called to be there. And he was quite the jet setter, so I was often called by him to come to Mexico or to go to Germany or whatever it was. But we live in a world that is so far away from the world that might have been, let's say, the world that [00:36:00] might be.

So John Milbank, a British theologian who's Inspiring to me and a friend and somebody who I found surprisingly parallel to Illich in a lot of ways after Ivan died and died I think feeling that he was pretty much alone in some of his understandings.

But John Milbank speaks of the, of recovering the future that we've lost, which is obviously have to be based on some sort of historical reconstruction. You have to find the place to go back to, where the wrong turning was, in a certain way. But meanwhile, we live in this world, right? Where even where you are, many people are dependent on tourism. Right?

And to that extent they live from it and couldn't instantly do without. To do without it would be, would be catastrophic. Right? So [00:37:00] it's it's not easy to live in both worlds. Right? To live with the understanding that this is, as Gustavo says, it's bound to be a source of hostility, right?

Because we can't sell what is ours as an experience for others without changing its character, right, without commodifying it. It's impossible to do. So it must be true and yet, at a certain moment, people feel that it has to be done, right? And so you have to live in in both realities.

And in a certain way, the skill of living in both realities is what's there at the beginning, right? That, if you take the formula of the incarnation as a nuclear explosion, well you're still going to have religion, right? So, that's inevitable. The [00:38:00] world has changed and it hasn't changed at the same time.

And that's true at every moment. And so you learn to walk, right? You learn to distinguish the gospel from its surroundings. And a story about Ivan that made a big impression on me was that when he was sent to Puerto Rico when he was still active as a priest in 1956 and became vice rector of the Catholic University at Ponce and a member of the school board.

A position that he regarded as entirely political. So he said, "I will not in any way operate as a priest while I'm performing a political function because I don't want these two things to get mixed up." And he made a little exception and he bought a little shack in a remote fishing village.

Just for the happiness of it, he would go there and say mass for the fishermen who didn't know anything about this other world. So, but that was[00:39:00] a radical conviction and put him at odds with many of the tendencies of his time, as for example, what came to be called liberation theology, right?

That there could be a politicized theology. His view was different. His view was that the church as "She," as he said, rather than "it," had to be always distinguished, right? So it was the capacity to distinguish that was so crucial for him. And I would think even in situations where tourism exists and has the effect Gustavo supposed, the beginning of resistance to that and the beginning of a way out of it, is always to distinguish, right?

To know the difference, which is a slim read, but, but faith is always a slim read and Ivan's first book, his first collection of published essays was [00:40:00] called Celebration of Awareness which is a way of saying that, what I call know the difference.

Chris: So I'm going to, if I can offer you this, this next question, which comes from James, a friend in Guelph, Canada. And James is curious about the missionary mandate of Christianity emphasizing a fellowship in Christ over ethnicity and whether or not this can be reconciled with Illich's perhaps emphatic defense of local or vernacular culture.

David: Well, yeah. He illustrates it. I mean, he was a worldwide guy. He was very far from his roots, which were arguably caught. He didn't deracinate himself. Hmm. He was with his mother and brothers exiled from Split in Dalmatia as a boy in the crazy atmosphere of the Thirties.

But he was a tumbleweed after [00:41:00] that. Mm-Hmm. . And so, so I think we all live in that world now and this is confuses people about him. So, a historian called Todd Hart wrote a book still really the only book published in English on the history of CIDOC and Cuernavaca, in which he says Illich is anti-missionary. And he rebukes him for that and I would say that Ivan, on his assumptions cannot possibly be anti missionary. He says clearly in his early work that a Christian is a missionary or is not a Christian at all, in the sense that if one has heard the good news, one is going to share it, or one hasn't heard it.

Now, what kind of sharing is that? It isn't necessarily, "you have to join my religion," "you have to subscribe to the following ten..." it isn't necessarily a catechism, it may be [00:42:00] an action. It may be a it may be an act of friendship. It may be an act of renunciation. It can be any number of things, but it has to be an outgoing expression of what one has been given, and I think he was, in that sense, always a missionary, and in many places, seeded communities that are seeds of the new church.

Right? He spent well, from the time he arrived in the United States in 51, 52, till the time that he withdrew from church service in 68, he was constantly preaching and talking about a new church. And a new church, for him, involved a new relation between innovation and tradition. New, but not new.

Since, when he looked back, he saw the gospel was constantly undergoing translation into new milieu, into new places, into new languages, into new forms.[00:43:00] But he encountered it in the United States as pretty much in one of its more hardened or congealed phases, right? And it was the export of that particular brand of cultural and imperialistic, because American, and America happened to be the hegemon of the moment. That's what he opposed.

The translation of that into Latin America and people like to write each other into consistent positions, right? So, he must then be anti missionary across the board, right? But so I think you can be local and universal. I mean, one doesn't even want to recall that slogan of, you know, "act locally, think globally," because it got pretty hackneyed, right?

And it was abused. But, it's true in a certain way that that's the only way one can be a Christian. The neighbor, you said it, I wrote it, Ivan said it, " the neighbor [00:44:00] can be anyone." Right?

But here I am here now, right? So both have to apply. Both have to be true. It's again a complementary relation. And it's a banal thought in a certain way, but it seems to be the thought that I think most often, right, is that what creates a great deal of the trouble in the world is inability to think in a complementary fashion.

To think within, to take contradiction as constituting the world. The world is constituted of contradiction and couldn't be constituted in any other way as far as we know. Right? You can't walk without two legs. You can't manipulate without two arms, two hands. We know the structure of our brains. Are also bilateral and everything about our language is constructed on opposition.

Everything is oppositional and yet [00:45:00] when we enter the world of politics, it seems we're going to have it all one way. The church is going to be really Christian, and it's going to make everybody really Christian, or communist, what have you, right? The contradiction is set aside. Philosophy defines truth as the absence of contradiction.

Hmm. Basically. Hmm. So, be in both worlds. Know the difference. Walk on two feet. That's Ivan.

Chris: I love that. And I'm, I'm curious about you know, one of the themes of the podcast is exile. And of course that can mean a lot of things. In the introduction to An Intellectual Journey, you wrote that that Illich, "once he had left Split in the 30s, that he began an experience of exile that would characterize his entire life."

You wrote that he had lost "not just the home, but the very possibility [00:46:00] of home." And so it's a theme that characterizes as well the podcast and a lot of these conversations around travel, migration, tourism, what does it mean to be at home and so, this, This notion of exile also shows up quite a bit in the Christian faith.

And maybe this is me trying to escape the complementarity of the reality of things. But I tend to see exile as inherently I'll say damaging or consequential in a kind of negative light. And so I've been wondering about this, this exilic condition, right? It's like in the Abrahamic faith, as you write "Judaism, Christianity, and Islam all begin in exile.

And eventually this pattern culminates. Jesus is executed outside the gates of the city, nailed to a cross that excludes him even from his native earth." And you write that "exile is in many ways the [00:47:00] Christian condition." And so, you know, I've read that in the past, Christian monks often consider themselves to be homeless, removed from the sort of daily life of the local community in the monasteries and abbeys and yet still of a universal brotherhood. And so I'd like to ask you if you feel this exilic condition, which seems to be also a hallmark of modernity, this kind of constant uprooting this kind of as I would call it, cultural and spiritual homelessness of our time, if you think that is part of the corruption that Illich based his work around?

David: Well, one can barely imagine the world in which Abram, who became Abraham said to God, no, I'm staying in Ur. Not going, I'm not going. Right? I mean, if you go back to Genesis and you re read that passage, when God shows [00:48:00] Abraham the land that he will inherit, it says already there, "there were people at that time living in the land," right?

Inconvenient people, as it turns out. Palestinians. So, there's a profound contradiction here, I think. And the only way I think you can escape it is to understand the Gospel the way Ivan understood it, which is as something super added to existing local cultures, right? A leaven, right?

Hmm. Not everything about a local culture or a local tradition is necessarily good. Mm hmm. And so it can be changed, right? And I would say that Illich insists that Christians are and must be missionaries. They've received something that they it's inherent in what they've [00:49:00] received that they pass it on.

So the world will change, right? But Ivan says, this is in Rivers North of the Future, that it's his conviction that the Gospel could have been preached without destroying local proportions, the sense of proportion, and he put a great weight on the idea of proportionality as not just, a pleasing building or a pleasing face, but the very essence of, of how a culture holds together, right, that things are proportioned within it to one another that the gospel could have been preached without the destruction of proportions, but evidently it wasn't, because the Christians felt they had the truth and they were going to share it. They were going to indeed impose it for the good of the other.

So, I think a sense of exile and a sense of home are as [00:50:00] necessary to one another as in Ivan's vision of a new church, innovation, and tradition, or almost any other constitutive couplet you can think of, right? You can't expunge exile from the tradition. But you also can't allow it to overcome the possibility of home.

I mean, Ivan spoke of his own fate as a peculiar fate, right? He really anticipated the destruction of the Western culture or civilization. I mean, in the sense that now this is a lament on the political right, mainly, right? The destruction of Western civilization is something one constantly hears about.

But, he, in a way, in the chaos and catastrophe of the 30s, already felt the death of old Europe. And even as a boy, I think, semi consciously at least, took the roots inside himself, took them with him [00:51:00] and for many people like me, he opened that tradition. He opened it to me. He allowed me to re inhabit it in a certain way, right?

So to find intimations of home because he wasn't the only one who lost his home. Even as a man of 78, the world in which I grew up here is gone, forgotten, and to some extent scorned by younger people who are just not interested in it. And so it's through Ivan that I, in a way, recovered the tradition, right?

And if the tradition is related to the sense of home, of belonging to something for good or ill, then that has to be carried into the future as best we can, right? I think Ivan was searching for a new church. He didn't think. He had found it. He didn't think he knew what it was.

I don't think he [00:52:00] described certain attributes of it. Right. But above all, he wanted to show that the church had taken many forms in the past. Right. And it's worldly existence did not have to be conceived on the model of a monarchy or a parish, right, another form that he described in some early essays, right.

We have to find the new form, right? It may be radically non theological if I can put it like that. It may not necessarily involve the buildings that we call churches but he believed deeply in the celebrating community. As the center, the root the essence of social existence, right? The creation of home in the absence of home, or the constant recreation of home, right? Since I mean, we will likely never again live in pure [00:53:00] communities, right? Yeah. I don't know if pure is a dangerous word, but you know what I mean?

Consistent, right? Closed. We're all of one kind, right? Right. I mean, this is now a reactionary position, right? Hmm. You're a German and you think, well, Germany should be for the Germans. I mean, it can't be for the Germans, seemingly. We can't put the world back together again, right?

We can't go back and that's a huge misreading of Illich, right? That he's a man who wants to go back, right? No. He was radically a man who wanted to rediscover the future. And rescue it. Also a man who once said to hell with the future because he wanted to denounce the future that's a computer model, right? All futures that are projections from the present, he wanted to denounce in order to rediscover the future. But it has to be ahead of us. It's not. And it has to recover the deposit that is behind us. So [00:54:00] both, the whole relation between past and future and indeed the whole understanding of time is out of whack.

I think modern consciousness is so entirely spatialized that the dimension of time is nearly absent from it, right? The dimension of time as duration as the integument by which past, present and future are connected. I don't mean that people can't look at their watch and say, you know, "I gotta go now, I've got a twelve o'clock." you know.

So, I don't know if that's an answer to James.

Chris: I don't know, but it's food for thought and certainly a feast, if I may say so. David, I have two final questions for you, if that's all right, if you have time. Okay, wonderful. So, speaking of this notion of home and and exile and the complementarity of the two and you know you wrote and [00:55:00] spoke to this notion of Illich wanting to rediscover the future and he says that "we've opened a horizon on which new paradigms for thought can appear," which I think speaks to what you were saying and At some point Illich compares the opening of horizons to leaving home on a pilgrimage, as you write in your book.

"And not the pilgrimage of the West, which leads over a traveled road to a famed sanctuary, but rather the pilgrimage of the Christian East, which does not know where the road might lead and the journey end." And so my question is,

What do you make of that distinction between these types of pilgrimages and what kind of pilgrimage do you imagine might be needed in our time?

David: Well, I, I mean, I think Ivan honored the old style of pilgrimage whether it was to [00:56:00] Canterbury or Santiago or wherever it was to. But I think ivan's way of expressing the messianic was in the word surprise, right? One of the things that I think he did and which was imposed on him by his situation and by his times was to learn to speak to people in a way that did not draw on any theological resource, so he spoke of his love of surprises, right? Well, a surprise by definition is what you don't suspect, what you don't expect. Or it couldn't be a surprise.

So, the The cathedral in Santiago de Compostela is very beautiful, I think. I've only ever seen pictures of it, but you must expect to see it at the end of your road. You must hope to see it at the end of your road. Well the surprise is going to be something else. Something that isn't known.[00:57:00]

And it was one of his Great gifts to me that within the structure of habit and local existence, since I'm pretty rooted where I am. And my great grandfather was born within walking distance of where I am right now. He helped me to look for surprises and to accept them also, right?

That you're going to show up or someone else is going to show up, right? But there's going to be someone coming and you want to look out for the one who's coming and not, but not be at all sure that you know who or what it is or which direction it's coming from. So, that was a way of life in a certain way that I think he helped others within their limitations, within their abilities, within their local situations, to see the world that way, right. That was part of what he did.

Chris: Yeah, it's really beautiful and I can [00:58:00] see how in our time, in a time of increasing division and despondency and neglect, fear even, resentment of the other, that how that kind of surprise and the lack of expectation, the undermining, the subversion of expectation can find a place into perhaps the mission of our times.

And so my final question comes back to friendship. and interculturality. And I have one final quote here from An Intellectual Journey, which I highly recommend everyone pick up, because it's just fascinating and blows open so many doors.

David: We need to sell a few more books, because I want that book in paperback. Because I want it to be able to live on in a cheaper edition. So, yes.

Chris: Of course. Thank you. Yeah. Please, please pick it up. It's worth every penny. So in An Intellectual Journey, it is written[00:59:00] by Illich that

"when I submit my heart, my mind, my body, I come to be below the other. When I listen unconditionally, respectfully, courageously, with the readiness to take in the other as a radical surprise, I do something else. I bow, bend over toward the total otherness of someone. But I renounce searching for bridges between the other and me, recognizing that a gulf separates us.

Leaning into this chasm makes me aware of the depth of my loneliness, and able to bear it in the light of the substantial likeness between the Other and myself. All that reaches me is the Other in His Word, which I accept on faith."

And so, David at another point in the biography you quote Illich describing faith as foolish. Now assuming that faith elicits a degree of danger or [01:00:00] betrayal or that it could elicit that through a kind of total trust, is that nonetheless necessary to accept the stranger or other as they are? Or at least meet the stranger or other as they are?

David: I would think so, yeah. I mean the passage you've quoted, I think to understand it, it's one of the most profound of his sayings to me and one I constantly revert to, but to accept the other in his word, or on his word, or her word, is, I think you need to know that he takes the image of the word as the name of the Lord, very, very seriously, and its primary way of referring to the Christ, is "as the Word."

Sometimes explicitly, sometimes not explicitly, you have to interpret. So, when he says that he renounces looking for bridges, I think he's mainly referring [01:01:00] to ideological intermediations, right, ways in which I, in understanding you exceed my capacity. I try to change my name for you, or my category for you, changes you, right?

It doesn't allow your word. And, I mean, he wasn't a man who suffered fools gladly. He had a high regard for himself and used his time in a fairly disciplined way, right? He wasn't waiting around for others in their world. So by word, what does he mean?

What is the other's word? Right? It's something more fundamental than the chatter of a person. So, I think what that means is that we can be linked to one another by Christ. So that's [01:02:00] the third, right? That yes, we're alone. Right? We haven't the capacity to reach each other, except via Christ.

And that's made explicit for him in the opening of Aylred of Riveau's Treatise on Friendship, which was peculiarly important to him. Aylred was an abbot at a Cistercian monastery in present day Yorkshire, which is a ruin now. But he wrote a treatise on friendship in the 12th century and he begins by addressing his brother monk, Ivo, and says, you know, " here we are, you and I, and I hope a third Christ."

So, Christ is always the third, right? So, in that image of the gulf, the distance, experiencing myself and my loneliness and yet renouncing any bridge, there is still a word, the word, [01:03:00] capital W, in which a word, your word, my word, participates, or might participate. So, we are building, according to him, the body of Christ but we have to renounce our designs on one another, let's say, in order to do that.

So I mean, that's a very radical saying, the, the other in his word and in another place in The Rivers North of the Future, he says how hard that is after a century of Marxism or Freudianism, he mentions. But, either way he's speaking about my pretension to know you better than you know yourself, which almost any agency in our world that identifies needs, implicitly does. I know what's best for you. So Yeah, his waiting, his ability to wait for the other one is, is absolutely [01:04:00] foundational and it's how a new world comes into existence. And it comes into existence at every moment, not at some unimaginable future when we all wait at the same time, right? My friend used to say that peace would come when everybody got a good night's sleep on the same night. It's not very likely, is it? Right, right, right. So, anyway, there we are.

Chris: Wow. Well, I'm definitely looking forward to listening to this interview again, because I feel like just like An Intellectual Journey, just like your most recent book my mind has been, perhaps exploded, another nuclear bomb dropped.

David: Chris, nice to meet you.

Chris: Yeah, I'll make sure that that book and, of course, links to yours are available on the end of the website.

David: Alright, thank you.

Chris: Yeah, deep bow, David. Thank you for your time today.

David: All the best. And thank you for those questions. Yeah. That was that was very interesting. You know, I spent my life as an interviewer. A good part of my [01:05:00] life. And interviewing is very hard work. It's much harder than talking. Listening is harder than talking. And rarer. So, it's quite a pleasure for me, late in life, to be able to just let her rip, and let somebody else worry about is this going in the right direction? So, thank you.

Leave a comment

Subscribe now

S5 #9 | We Will Dance With Stillness w/ Craig Slee

Chris Christou — Tue, 17 Sep 2024 15:27:56 GMT

On this episode, my guest is Craig Slee, a disabled writer, consultant and theorist dealing with mythology, folklore, magic and culture, exploring life through the lens of landscape, disability and fugitive embodiments.

He has contributed essays and poetry focusing on the numinous and disability to various anthologies including The Dark Mountain Journal. Craig has also co-facilitated multiple seminar series at the Dresden Academy for Fine Arts, regarding ableism in the arts, as well as how ableism affects our relationship to space.

In 2023 he was one of the speakers at the World Futures Studies Federation 50th Anniversary Conference, introducing the concept of (Dis)abling Futures. Craig resides in the northwest of England.

Subscribe now

Show Notes

Cornwall and the Seasons

Who Gets to Decide What it Means to Know a Place?

The Folding in of Identity to Tourism

A Question of Productive vs Generative Ability

Ableism and Attention

Finger Bending and the Freedom of Movement

Redefining and Remembering Other Forms of Movement

What is Stillness?

The Dance of Mountains

Obeying Limits

Homework

Cold Albion (Craig’s Blog)

Goetic Atavisms (Hadean Press)

Craig’s Blue Sky Page | Facebook Page

Transcript

Chris: Welcome to the End of Tourism, Craig.

Craig: Thank you for having me.

Chris: Yes, it's great to be able to speak with you today. I've been ruminating for a couple of years now as to the themes that we might speak of. And I was introduced to you via a mutual friend and have come closer to your work via the Emergence Network's online gathering, We Will Dance With Mountains, in the last quarter of 2023.

And so, to begin, I'd like to ask you first where you find yourself today and what the world looks like for you, where you are.

Craig: Where I find myself today is by the canal in my flat, looking out the window, just as evenings coming in, in the northwest of England, in Lancaster, and it's chilly here which is actually a good thing, I guess, these days.

Chris: Perhaps I could ask you to elaborate a little bit on what Lancaster looks like, but I know that, you know, from our conversations previous that you grew up [00:01:00] in Cornwall, a place that was previously, a town, an area devoted to fishing and mining, and from what you've told me, it's also become a massive tourist trap that you know, from the little that I've seen online, that the area receives around 5 million visitors a year, and tourism makes up about a quarter of the local economy.

So I'm curious what you've seen change there and what do you think has happened to Cornwall and its people as a result and maybe there's something in there as well regarding Lancaster.

Craig: Yeah, so I should emphasize this. I was born in Cornwall. My family has been lived down there for many many generations anyway and my father's side of the family actually, at various points, worked in the tourist trade as well before they went on to other things.

And, [00:02:00] yeah, I mean, I left because, frankly, there was no jobs that weren't tourism. I came to Lancaster to study because one, I have a physical disability which means that Cornwall is a very rural area, so you need to drive everywhere, and that's fine, I drove at that point, but for good or ill, a more urban center was better for me later in life as I left.

But the way that it shifted, even in the years when I was growing up, was that, you know, essentially was a rural area where nothing really happened socially or culturally that much until the summer seasons. So, you were very, very aware of the seasons in terms of, you'd have visitors [00:03:00] starting, and that was when the town would wake up, and then it was kind of dead for the rest of the year, so it was very much one of those things where the tourist trade has actually made me more aware of human rhythms in the natural world than perhaps I would have been, because it's so based on seasonal stuff.

And just looking at the way the infrastructure because a lot of the towns and areas, they boomed a little bit well, quite a lot in certain areas with the tin mining of the 19th century. But a lot of the architecture and things like that was 19th century. So you had small villages and slightly larger towns, and they have very, well, I guess some people, if they were tourists, would call "quaint, narrow streets."

And when you have that many visitors, in the summer, you can't get down the streets. [00:04:00] You can't drive it because it's full of people walking. You know, there's an interesting anecdote I'd like to recount of when my father, he was a vicar, he was a priest, moved to a new area he would go to the local pub and all the locals would greet him as the priest and be like, very polite.

And then when it would come out that my dad was actually a local, that he was born down there and part of the family, everybody would relax. And there was this real sort of strange thing where people came and stayed because it was a lovely area, but there was still that whole issue with second homes and certainly keeping an eye on things from a distance here during the pandemic when people left cities during the pandemic, they went down there amongst places in Britain.

And that meant that, [00:05:00] literally, there were no houses for newly starting teachers, you know, teachers who had got jobs and were moving down there, couldn't find places to live because during the 2020 and sort of 2022 period, everything was just opening up either as Airbnb because there was this influx from the cities to the more rural areas because it was supposedly safer.

You know, and I feel like that's a reflex that is really interesting because most people think of it as, oh, "a tourist area," people go there for leisure, they go there to relax and get away from their lives, which is true, but under a stressful situation like a pandemic, people also flee to beautiful quotes isolated areas, so there's that real sense of pressure, I think and this idea that we weren't entirely sure, growing up, [00:06:00] whether we would have a place to live because a lot of the housing was taken up by people with second homes. And plenty of people I went to school with because it's a surfing area took the knowledge that they learned in the tourism trade, and actually left and went to Australia. And they live on the Gold Coast now. So it's this self perpetuating thing, you know?

Chris: Well, that leads me to my next question, which kind of centers around belonging and being rooted and learning to root, maybe even becoming a neighbor or some might say a citizen of a place.

And with tourism or a touristic worldview, we seem to be largely stunted in our ability to know a place, to become part of that place in any significant or enduring sense of the word. And so, I'm curious what your thoughts are on what it means to know a place, [00:07:00] and perhaps on the often mad rush to say I know a place for the sake of social capital, you know, given the context of the kind of relative difficulties that one might incur, or in a place like Cornwall, and the relative degree of exile that forces people out.

What do you think it means to know a place in the context of all of these economic pressures denying us that possibility, or at least making it really, really difficult.

Craig: I think we have a real problem in modernity with the idea of knowing as a sense of capture, right? So if I know you, I have this boundary of this shape, this outline of Chris, right, that I can hold, that I can grasp. And I think sometimes when we say, "oh, I know a place," or, "oh, I know a person" there's no concept of the [00:08:00] ongoing relationality. You know, you capture the image and then you keep it. And it's a whole construct of extractive knowledge that really, I think, comes down to the idea that the humans are the ones who get to decide what a place is, right?

So. I could say in the standard sense, "Oh, I know Cornwall because I, you know, I grew up there for nearly 20 years." My family has been there since about the 1500s. You know, "I know a place, it's in my bones." Yada yada yada. All the metaphors you want to use. But the fact of the matter is, the place itself influences me more than I influence it. So there's this strange sense of belonging in which modernity [00:09:00] says "I belong" or "it belongs to me" rather than perhaps the place has extended hospitality to me and allowed me to grow and I could live/work in a place for 30 years and never know it because we're not comfortable as a culture with the idea of going, "I don't know this place."

And it's a variety. It's always changing. And I think about all the times I used to watch the sea and talk to folks whose parents were fishermen or lifeboatmen, and they'd be like, "Yeah, we know the waters, but the waters can change. We know roughly what they do under certain conditions, but we don't know them completely, because they can always surprise us."

And So, when somebody says, "oh, you're from Cornwall, you're a Cornishman," and all that sense of identity, [00:10:00] I'm like, "yeah, but that's, that's both really fluid for me, because, you know, there's a lot of history." Is it the tourist world of the 20th and 21st century, or is it the farming and the mining that goes back to the Neolithic?

How we relate to a place purely in a modern sense isn't, to my mind anyway, the only way to conceive of belonging because, even though I'm now 300 miles away from there, I have its isotopes, its minerals from drinking the water in my teeth, you know. So, on some level, the idea that you have to be in a place also to belong to a place is something that I'm curious about because, there's this whole notion, [00:11:00] "you're only in the place and you've been in a place for this long and that means you know it and you're local." Whereas growing up, there was this sort of weird thing where it was like, "yeah, you might have been here 30 years and everybody knows you, but you're not a local." Right? You still belong, but there was this other category of " you're not local or something like that."

And so it's complicated, but I really do, for my personal take, tend to look at it as a, the landscape, or wherever it is, influences my sense of belonging in a non human context, or more than human context, if that makes sense.

Chris: Hmm. Yeah, there's so much there. Yeah. I mean, I'm also, in the context of identity, also wondering in what ways, not only has the tourism industry shaped one's identity of being local, which [00:12:00] is, I think, a huge issue in over touristed places in the last, you know, 10 or 20 years, as identity politics rises into the mainstream, and but then also not just the industry and the interaction with foreigners or, or guests, or tourists, but the way in which the image of that place is crafted through, often, ministries of culture or heritage, you know, so you could grow up in a place that isn't necessarily overly touristed or anything like that. But then have your identity crafted by these ideas of culture or heritage that the government's, federal and otherwise, have placed on people.

Craig: And especially because where I come from, Cornwall, actually had its own language, which died out, which was on the verge of dying out in the 19th century. And slowly there are more speakers of it now. And you go back there now and you'll find, [00:13:00] even when I was growing up it wasn't so prevalent, but you'll find a lot of the signs for the street signs will have the English and the Cornish.

So that's where the government has embraced this identity and enhanced it after people have been saying, you know, "this is a language we've rebuilt it. It's cousin to Welsh and Breton. We should use it. It's part of our identity and it's got folded into that." And so the infrastructure itself is now been part of that.

You know, those very same streets have a name that wasn't known for like, 50, 60, maybe to 80 years, and suddenly people are now deliberately using the old names in non English languages because of that. And it's very strange because, especially in the UK, what with all [00:14:00] of Brexit and all that, there is a very weird sense wherein the rest of England, i. e. North and London and those sort of areas don't understand because Cornwall was a peripheral area and much like Wales, there's a lot of distrust of central government. Hmm. So, you've got this whole construction of a personal identity of nobody actually really understands what goes on outside.

Either they're incomers, either they're emmets. You know, which "emmets" is the old English for "ants." Referring to tourists as ants in a kind of, yeah, they get everywhere. And the whole notion of who we are is always constructed. But in that case, going away and coming back to visit, I'm going, "Well that street didn't [00:15:00] have that label on it when I left. But it does now. And so in a certain sense it's the same place, but it's got this overlay of somewhere different that really enhances that sense of layers for me of "which Cornwall?" "Which of any of these places are we talking about?"

Like you say, is it the one you see on a picture postcard or an Instagram or is it the ones who sat there as kids going, right, 'there's nothing to do, let's go and drink in a field?' You know and all of these things can co exist.

Chris: Hmm, right. Yeah, I just interviewed a friend of mine, Christos Galanis, who did his PhD on hillwalkers, as well as homecomers in the Scottish Highlands, so people who spend their weekends climbing, summiting the Highland Mountains, and also the Canadian or Americans who travel to Scotland on heritage trips or ancestral [00:16:00] journeys. And he mentioned how in the Highlands that the governments have placed the original Gaelic place names on all of the the signs there, whether you're entering a village or perhaps on the street signs as well.

And that he said that something like "only three percent of the of the people in Scotland actually speak, speak Gaelic," so they see the sign, they see the name, the vast majority of people, and they have no idea what it means. And I also remember the last time I was in Toronto, which is where I'm from originally, or where I grew up.

And my family grew up in the east end of town, and the main thoroughfare in the east end of town is largely referred to as "Greek Town." You know, when I was a kid it was certainly Greek Town. The Greek letters, the Greek alphabet names as well as the English names of the street signs in that area.

But it's much, much, much less Greek than it was 25 years ago, right? So again, [00:17:00] this question of like, is that to some extent trying to solidify the kind of cultural geography of a place. That people come to that street and that neighborhood because they want to experience Greekness in its diasporic kind of context.

And yet, so many of those people, so many of those families have moved on or moved along or become more Canadian in their own sense of the word, so.

Craig: Yeah. It's very strange as well because things like that attract... there's a loop obviously, because you'll get people coming to experience the greekness or the cornishes, and people will be like, oh, we should open a business that will enhance the greekness or the Cornish of the place, and that will draw, and it just becomes this thing and, yeah.

Yeah, it's very strange. And I would totally agree with you on that one.

Chris: Yeah. [00:18:00] Yeah. Until like a Greek person from Greece or a Cornish grandmother comes into town and says like, what? No, that's not Yeah. Oh, yeah. So I'd like to shift the conversation, Craig, a little bit towards ableism, and begin with this question that comes from our dear mutual friend Aerin and who admits that she's happily robbed it directly from Fiona Kumari Campbell.

Yes.

So, you might have heard this question before but she she felt the need to kind of pose it anew and and so the question is this. How does disability productively color our lives and Aerin wanted to ask it, to modify it slightly and ask, how does disability generatively or creatively color our lives?

Craig: I can't speak to anybody's life other than my own really. But I would say that for me disability has, [00:19:00] one, given me a real sort of ability to look at the world and go, "you guys think this is how everything works and it clearly doesn't."

You know, it has given me a generative gift of going, "hold on, what people think of the default really isn't the default, because I was never born as the default, and so I've had to find my own way of relating to the world" and that means that anybody goes anytime anybody goes "Oh, well, everybody knows..." or "the only way to do it is this?"

I am always going "are you absolutely sure about that?" You know, "are you absolutely sure that what you're looking at or experiencing or noticing is only perceivable in one way, it's only ever [00:20:00] frameable, in one context?" But also this idea for me that disability is simply a fact.

It's not good or bad. It is a thing that exists in the world and ableism is essentially the urge to measure against the vast field of disability and impairment and go, "We don't want that. That's the worst thing to be. So, we will strive to not be that." As Fiona Kumari Campbell would say, " It sets up a ranking and notification and prioritization of sentient life."

So, this is why we, to a certain extent, we have such a obsession with youth culture. Young, healthy, fit folks are in some way better than the elderly. Oh god, nobody wants [00:21:00] to get old cause, if you're of white extraction, "oh, they'll probably stick you in a home."

Nobody wants to conceive of the idea that actually you can have a generative and intimate relationship with somebody, not necessarily a romantic one, but a deep, deep friendship that also involves, frankly to put it crudely, perhaps wiping somebody's arse, right? There's this whole notion of messiness and failure and why Aerin reworded it from "productive" to "generative" is that whole idea of being productive, of having capitalist use, to produce, to make for purposes. And for me, disability and the field of disability in which I exist says "I exist and I don't have to be productive." it really [00:22:00] challenges the capitalist framework for me.

And also, ableism, because it's set up to rank things like speed, mobility, all kinds of things like that, having a disability where you're sitting there going, but there are other ways to do this. There are other ways to exist. To notice the way our bodies move that are mostly ignored in the sense of "yeah, we don't pay attention to our posture or our muscle structure or what our guts are doing because we're all already forced along to the next thing.

You know, we're already touring from, "okay, I've got up in the morning. Next thing I've got to do is have breakfast," right? And if you can easily shift between those stages, so you get up in the morning, start your breakfast, put your clothes on easily. [00:23:00] You don't think about it as much, but if it takes you 10, 20 minutes to even get out of bed and you have to do specific things, maybe exercises, maybe things like that, the whole process thickens.

And in a sense, for me, it's an antithesis to escapism because there are things you cannot escape. There are things you have to deal with. And because there are things you have to deal with, you have to pay attention to them more. And that means the most ordinary mundane thing becomes or can become, if you're willing to gently sense it, a lot richer.

So, this is one of those interesting things where if people want to go places to experience new things, Okay, that's a whole issue that you've obviously talked about throughout the podcast, but there is a certain sense in [00:24:00] which we don't even know where we started from. We've not explored our own bodies.

I mean, I wrote a piece in 2020 when all the lockdowns hit that got shared around various bits of the internet and I think even in the newspaper at one point in, but I got a request to syndicate it, of how to exist when you're stuck in your house. You know, what do you do to "keep," in inverted commas, "sane," which, of course, is an ableist framework, but what do you do to stop yourself from losing mental health? How do you function?

And I broke it down and I sort of made practical suggestions of, this is how I, as somebody that doesn't actually have a, quotes, "normal life," and spends a lot of his time unable to travel or go out much, stops myself from feeling isolated, [00:25:00] because I've ended up having to learn to explore what some might regard as a limited domain.

But to me, that limited area, that limited domain has given me this sense of vastness that's, you know, I can't remember which philosopher it is, but there is a philosopher who basically says, I think it is a Camus, who says "you just need to reopen when you're in your room and the whole world will reveal itself to you."

And when you don't have a choice, when you're stuck in chronic pain, or sickness, or something like that and you have to work out what to do with your limited energy, to embrace life, there becomes a sort of challenge, to go, "okay, how can I feel like things are enriching? How can I, almost metabolize the things that other people would reject.

You know, [00:26:00] because disability is so "Oh, it's so sad he's disabled. Or we've got the cure for this and that. And we've got to cure it." And it's not really about ameliorating suffering. Which is a good thing. It's an analoid good to ameliorate any form of suffering. But there is this sense that the only way to perceive the world is through a so called "non disabled" abled body.

The only way to experience a rich world, and again, I'm not knocking people who do a lot of travelling per se, but the only way to experience the world is to go on long journeys, and backpack and explore you know, new ways of thinking. That's great. And I'm not saying you can do exactly the same at home, but you can also become radically hospitable to yourself and to the environment in which you find [00:27:00] yourself.

And that opens a whole lot of doors that I think I would regard as generatively colouring life and revealing life. In a way that was possibly occluded before.

Chris: Yeah, I mean, so much of what I've come to in the research around tourism and hypermobility is this question of limits.

And that certainly comes up in other themes, in other contexts. But not just the limits to one's place. Like, where does your place end? But also the limits of the human body. And, when we talk about freedom generally in the West, or in, in the context of modernity, it's so often pinned or underpinned via the freedom of movement, in part, because I know you're coming from the other side of the Atlantic, but certainly in, in this part of the [00:28:00] world, in the Americas and especially North America, freedom is understood as freedom of movement because that's in part how, the states and, and the nation's existences are justified.

And so, I would just ask you what you think of that in the context of freedom being, of course a synonym for liberation. And how so many of our western notions of freedom are attached to movement and have. To a large degree become glorified in the hyper mobility of our times.

Craig: I would agree with you. I think it was always there because of the colonial urge, but I think North American notions of freedom have, through a certain cultural hegemony, filtered back. You get it in the media, even Star Trek, you know, the final frontier, you know. Things like that. Or wide open spaces. There's still this notion of, freedom to move, room to live. It has its own European context and [00:29:00] horrors, unfortunately.

But also, I think the notion of freedom as freedom to move. There is a question there for me, because I'm not sure we know what we're doing when we move. Right? And one of the questions that always was raised for me is, if I raise my finger, as I'm doing now, and I bend it so it's 90 degrees, how did I do that?

What did I do? Well, science would say, okay, you used all your tendons and so on and so forth, and I'm like, yeah, "okay, those are nice descriptors. But what did I actually do?" Where's the connection between the impulse and the urge to bend my finger? Right. I don't know what I did there. I just thought I'm gonna bend my finger and the [00:30:00] finger bent But there's a whole bunch of stuff going on.

So when I'm thinking about freedom of movement First the question is, "freedom to move in what way?" Right? So the the classic example is, in perhaps North America and and English speaking countries is "to go where I want, when I want, with none to to gainsay me, none to say you can't go there," which has been problematized thanks to the history of enclosure of land and capture by state and political actors, but also this notion that if you get into a city and you can go and people go, "Oh, I'm free to go wherever I want."

I always sit there and I'm going, "yes, but you can go wherever you want, but if a place has stairs and no lift..." right? I [00:31:00] can't go there. So do I have less freedom? Well, according to the traditional notions of freedom, yes. I am less free. When I grew up, as an example in the UK I went to America when I was about four or five, and I was absolutely stunned by the amount of public toilets that had a disabled toilet.

Right? Because virtually nowhere where I grew up at that point had a disabled toilet. This was due to the fact that the U. S. has a disability rights movement that was slightly ahead of the U. K. 's. So I was freer to go about my holiday in the U. S. than I was technically at home. I couldn't go certain places because there weren't toilets, or there weren't ramps, because that had not been legalized. You know, there'd been no legislation.

In the UK, there was [00:32:00] no disability legislation until 1995. You know, so technically, I was born in 1981. I had no specific extra legal rights that I needed for 14 years. Now some would say, "oh, that, you've got freedom there... the law has given you freedom.

It's giving you the ability to move, but it's only given me the ability to move in approved ways, right? And so every single time somebody talks about room to move, my query is always, okay. "One, as I said, move in what way? And two, who taught you what method of movement is approved or disproved?" So, particularly in Europe, we have folks like the Romani, the Irish travellers, [00:33:00] even the so called New Age travellers, right, who are nomadic folks.

And despite this obsession with freedom, the idea that people are nomadic, are shiftless and rootless, still exists.

Yes, a degree. The degree of privilege, the degree that I could be, quote, "more confident going into public spaces." And you'll see this in American history and throughout European history as well.

And when I was talking about the nomadic folks, I was saying, you know, there are only certain people who are allowed to move in certain ways, to travel in certain ways that are approved. In similar ways with disability there were only certain kinds of people who were allowed into public spaces.

They might not have been legislated against in the mid twentieth century. They might have struck those off the books, but at [00:34:00] various points, at least in the US, if you look up the Chicago Ugly Laws, people who were regarded as vagrants or unsightly, were not allowed in public spaces. They could be jailed for that.

It's not just loitering. It was very much anything that could give offense because they were physically disabled. Or, the idea that the physically disabled are more likely to be begging or doing things like that. That was all folded in. So, this notion of freedom as the ability to move and move in space.

Despite the North American urge to be like, "well, nobody can tell me what to do." There's still a certain level of certain forms of movement are privileged or regarded as normal versus others. So, you know it's weird if you don't stay [00:35:00] in one place or perhaps, it's weird if you don't have a reason for your seasonal job, right?

When I was a kid and a teenager... like I said, where I grew up was kind of known for surfing, right? And I met folks who would come from places like Australia and live in Volkswagen transporter vans and work in the seasonal hotels and then go surfing. And then sometimes in the winter they disappear off to Morocco.

And you wouldn't see them for six months and they'd come back and there's all this kind of idea of Differing rhythms, which has really influenced my entire life because those folks, they were there there were hundreds of them you could see them parked on every road and I knew several of them very very well, but the fact of those seasonal rhythms, which weren't [00:36:00] approved. It wasn't approved that they didn't stay in one place and pay taxes.

To some that might be, you know, "Oh, that's freedom! That's telling the government, I don't have to pay your taxes or I don't have to stay in one place and be a registered visible citizen. I can be a free spirit and go to Morocco whenever I want. But, the fact of it is, if you walked on the, on the roads, people would look at you funny, right?

If you look at people who do long distance walking in areas that are drivable, I mean, especially I guess in North America, that's looked at as very, very, very strange, because you guys don't have the infrastructure. So, for me, it's this really strange notion that we're fixated on particular kinds of movement to do with agency and power, right?

And we, we will say, "oh, [00:37:00] that's mobile, that's fast, that's quick, that's agile." And I'm always curious about what criteria we're using to say, "oh, that's fast, that's agile, that's nimble," when you look at the so called natural world, and you've got plants that are seemingly immobile, but they actually turn to the sun.

You just don't notice it until you stick it on a stop motion camera. And then you're like, "wow, they move." But you could go past that plant every single day and be like, "yeah, it doesn't move. It's a plant. It just stays there." Right? Because our perception of what movement is and what is approved is based around one, what we're taught and two, what we see every day.

But also three. What we can't notice unless we're forced to look at the same thing over and over again, right? [00:38:00] Because our tendency is to see one thing, think, "Oh, I know it. I've spotted it. I know what it is. I've identified it. It's fitted into my matrix of identity. I can move on now. It's all sorted." But the whole ethos, I guess, that I'm coming at is

what if you don't know? What if you don't know? What if that microphone that I'm speaking into and you're speaking into it looks like a particular thing and you think you could describe a microphone to somebody but go down to say the flows of the electrons and it's a context issue. You know? And, and So, I'm interested in thinking about what are the contexts are in the room with us right now that we're not even paying any attention to, and not even in the room, in our own bodies, in our own language.

Chris: Wow. Yeah, again, there's so much there. My [00:39:00] my thoughts just flew off into a million different directions. And I feel like it would probably take me a while to to gather them in.

Craig: No problem. You do what you need to do. I mean, that's, that's the whole point.

Chris: Yeah. So I had a queer crip travel writer named Bani Amor on the podcast in season three.

And we were talking about the fallout and the consequences of the COVID 19 pandemic. And she said something like, you know, "the settler can't stay still. That the pandemic showed us that we can't stay still." In the context of that time that so many people who had been engaged in and who glorify or who simply have been taught to live a hyper mobile life, that there was this opportunity to question [00:40:00] that, to bring it into a different context.

And I know a lot of people, couldn't necessarily leave their houses in the quote unquote lockdowns. But I don't think that wouldn't necessarily stop people from tending to or allowing themselves to witness the more than human world in that way. And so, my question is, assuming we have the opportunity, in some manner, in any manner, how do you think we might have our understandings of movements subverted, or at least challenged, by virtue of looking at the movement in the more than human world.

Craig: Great question. I think one of the biggest notions, and I just want to return to that phrase, "the settler can't stay still." And really, agree with that, and so add to secondary things of what actually is stillness, right? We have [00:41:00] this idea of stillness as immobility, as, as, as perhaps staying in one place.

Not moving, but actually, if we look at what we're doing when we're actually apparently still, there's still movement going on, right? There's still movement going on in our bodies. There's still a different kind of mobility going. And we're not the only ones, right? The more than human does this exactly as well.

If you look at a rock, oh, you think a rock doesn't move? I mean, it doesn't move, but then you have erosion, right? Then you have the rain, and the way that particles are shaved off it, and it shifts. So, when we're thinking about outside, when we're thinking about... and when I say "more than [00:42:00] human," I'm not saying "better than human," I'm saying "exceeding the human," I just want to make that clear, it exceeds the boundaries of the human.

Disability as mutual friend Bayo would define it is, I believe he said "it's a failure of power to contain itself." So, that's Bayo Akomolafe. And this notion that the world and the modern human flows through and beyond any sort of boundary, right? So, any outline we form is not immune in the sense of there's no boardwalk, right?

A wall is not an untouchable upright edifice. It's actually touched and permeated, right? So everything in the more than human context interrelates and is, to a certain extent, degrees of [00:43:00] permeable. So, yeah, our cells keep certain things out, and let certain things in, but even the things they keep out, they're in contact with.

They're relating to. Right? Because in the same way, with COVID 19 vaccine, people think, "oh, it's a vaccine. It's immunity, right? It'll stop me getting COVID. Or it'll stop me getting this, or stop me getting that." What it actually does is it has an interaction with your, the vaccine has an interaction with your immune system.

There's a dialogue, there's a discussion, a call and response, which then engenders further responses in your body, right? So, there's constant relation that is ongoing. So, nothing is one and done, right? To borrow from Stefano Hani and Fred Moten No motion is ever completed, right? Nothing's [00:44:00] ever finished.

It's not like we're gonna get off this and, and you'll be like, "oh, I've finished recording the podcast." Sure, you've hit the stop recording button, but the recording of the podcast is still ongoing. And there's this fundamental ongoingness, which is a product of the world.

The world is worlding, right? And that means the most ordinary, mundane thing you can think of is ongoing. The mug I have right in front of me right now with tea in it. It's ceramic. It's been painted, but it's still ongoing, right? It still has the relation to the machines that shaped it. And it also has this ongoingness with the human history of pottery.

Right? And people go, Oh, that's ridiculous. That's not practical. You know, "it's a mug," but I always [00:45:00] think. Isn't that just commodification? Like, is that not just saying it's a commodity, it doesn't have a story? Like, I don't want to get all Marxist here, but there's that real alienation from ongoingness and the fact that we also are ongoing attempts at relation.

We're not even fixed identities. Our movements cannot be technically circumscribed because I have a disability which means I can't dance. Right? I use a wheelchair. I can't dance. I can't do the tango. Right? Okay. But everybody uses dance in a context of bopping to the music and doing all this thing and it's a bit like freedom. You know, everybody assumes that dance is a particular thing.

But as Bayo and We Will Dance with Mountains, the course, the whole point of it being [00:46:00] called We Will Dance with Mountains is the fact that mountains don't dance like humans. Mountains dance like mountains. And the only way we spot how mountains dance is to actually pay attention to them and attempt to relate to them.

We can't get out of our framework completely, but we can be open to say, what does our framework for a mountain miss about those massive landforms? What are we missing when we say a mountain doesn't move? And that's where you have references to indigenous and local stories that actually talk about these landforms, these places, these folklore places, as the living, moving beings that they actually are.

Hmm. You know. Yeah, "okay, that stone circle over there was because a bunch of women were dancing on a [00:47:00] Sunday and in a Christian country, that's bad, so they got turned to stone," or in Scandinavia, "that rock there, it's actually a troll that got caught out in the sun."

that these are living, ongoing beings and events, which it's not woo, it's actual or intellectual, I think.

If you look at anything for long enough, you start to notice what's ongoing with it, even something that's solid and fixed. And that, to me, the gripping is the bending of the perception, right? That is queering, but crip-queering is that point where you have the restriction involved. People will talk about queer liberation, and yeah, we want crip liberation. That's cool. But if you think about crip liberation as, it might actually be the limits that bring us liberation.

And then, if you track back [00:48:00] into mythologies long enough. You've got figures like Dionysus or then poetic gods who say, they're the ones that fetter you. They can bind you, but they can also set you free. And that is really interesting to me that a lot of these liberational figures also have a side that they can tie you up.

And I don't just mean in a bondage sense. It's this notion that the two things, the two complexes are part of a whole thing, and you can't divide it into restricted and free and you can't escape. You can't pull a Harry Houdini from existence, which, to a certain extent, some people, when they go on holiday, engage in tourism, they're trying to escape for a little while, their other lives. But we all know you can't escape them.

Mm-Hmm. But the inescapability of it is not bad. Right. By default, it's not [00:49:00] bad. It can be, but the assumption something is inescapable, just like, oh, something is disabling. Mm-Hmm. the assumption of good and bad. If you can hold that in abeyance and actually look at it for a second and go, Okay, what's going on here?

Maybe our conceptions of this need reevaluating. Now the reason we don't do this on the regular, even in modernity, is because it takes a lot of effort and time to focus. And that's another benefit that I get as a disabled person, right? Because I can't use my time for a whole bunch of things that non disabled folks can.

So I've got more time, I've got a different relationship to time and space, which means that I can sit and look at things with that differing relation to time and space, and be like "Huh, I never noticed that." And then I get to talk [00:50:00] about this stuff to folks like you, and people get surprised.

And they're like, "you think about this all the day." I'm like, "no, I don't think about this. This is my life. This is how I live. This is my embrace of life, right? And this is my freedom to literally, Be like, " well, okay, my restrictions. How do they actually open me to the world?" And I'm not offering a prescription here, because everybody's different.

But it strikes me that even the most nomadic person always carry stuff with them, right? And to borrow from Ursula K. Le Guin with her "Carrier Bag Story of Fiction," which Bayo talked about in We Will Dance The Mountains, the idea of what we're carrying is really interesting, but how often do we rummage in our own bags?

Hmm. [00:51:00] Right? How often do we take off our backpacks and rummage just for the sake of it? Often we just look in the backpacks for something specific. Hmm. Right? Oh, I need a map. Oh, I need a chocolate bar. Oh, I need my, you know my iPad. We rarely stick our hands in and notice the way our clothing might shift around our fingers or the way, you know, the waterproofing is possibly coming off and means that the fabric has these different textures because we don't take the time and there's nothing wrong with that, but it's the fact that we don't have that relationship to time and space.

And babies, kids do. It's why kids put things in their mouth. All those things where you're like, "Oh no, don't put that in your mouth, it's bad for you." They don't know that. But the whole point of putting it in their mouth and feeling it is to try and not [00:52:00] understand it, not get it.

There's nothing there in a baby in its early function that says, "I must understand what that is." The understanding comes upon you through experience. But there's no bit, at least as far as I can work out, that's like, "I must understand what it is that I'm putting in my mouth."

It's more like, "hmm, that tastes interesting, it has some interesting textures," and then your brain does all the work or your brain and your body mind do all the work, but the personhood isn't also doing all the work, just like the "I" of my body, right, my relationship with the "I", as in my sense of self, I have to expand that to my entire body, You know, because there's so much going on right now in this conversation that I'm not aware of, right?

There's stuff going on in my room that I'm [00:53:00] not aware of, but it's going on now. And so I have to expand and that expansiveness also means I sometimes have to venture into realms of pain, right? Because I have chronic pain. And in order to fully experience that, sometimes I have to encounter that pain.

I have to slow down and focus and go, "Oh, the chronic pain that I was mostly ignoring because just in the background, it suddenly leaped to the fore because I'm paying attention." Now, modernity says you shouldn't do that. You shouldn't do stuff that causes you pain. Understandable in a certain context, but If I didn't understand that the pain was also part of the experience and changes how I move, if I didn't understand that chronic pain changes how time stretches, then I wouldn't be where I am.

So the more than human permeates the human in ways [00:54:00] that the human is either deliberately trained to deny or doesn't even know is going on and the pandemic basically was, in my eyes, the more than human kind of knocking on the door going you are not this completely hermetically sealed box, right? Your society is not a hermetically sealed box.

Chris: Amen. Amen. I mean, could have gone in a lot of different directions, but here we are, at least being able to reflect on it in a good way, and I'm reminded, this notion of abeyance and attention and, and the expansion of the I.

I'm reminded of this, this line from Simone Weil who said that "absolutely unmixed attention is prayer." And so, I think that it, something like that is worthy of the times we, we wish to live in and perhaps sometimes do.

Craig: [00:55:00] Definitely.

Chris: And so, you know, I wish we had more time, Craig really getting into some beautiful black holes there. But hopefully we get the opportunity to speak again sometime.

Craig: I'd be, be happy to. Be happy to.

Chris: And so before we depart, I'd just like to ask the kind of token question that always comes at the end of interviews, which is where can our listeners find your work?

And I'm pretty sure you had a book that came out last year entitled, Goetic Atavisms, if I'm not mistaken.

Craig: Yes, I did. So you can find me on my mostly moribund, but strange little blog at cold-albion.net. And you can also pick up the book, which is, to be clear, more of an occult angle on this, but it also brings in the disability angle directly from the publisher Hadean Press or you could get it from, you know, the Bezos Behemoth, if you really [00:56:00] wanted. I am also not really on social media as a project, but I'm also on you know Blue Sky, so you can search me up there, or Mastodon, which you could always search me up there, and I occasionally post things on there.

Chris: Wonderful. Well, I'll make sure that all those links and connections are available for our listeners once the episode launches. And I very much look forward to reading Goetic Activisms myself. So, thank you so much, Craig.

Chris: Thank you, Chris.

Leave a comment

Subscribe now

S5 #8 | Unpacking the Last Tourist w/ Jesse Mann & Tyson Sadler (The Last Tourist)

Chris Christou — Tue, 13 Aug 2024 14:10:57 GMT

On this episode, my guests are Jesse Mann (editor-director) and Tyson Sadler (director), the brains behind the documentary The Last Tourist.

Jesse is both a picture editor and director whose professional work has spanned commercial, tv and film projects. The Last Tourist is her second feature film as editor. Her first film, as both editor and director, Material Success, screened internationally and won the Audience Choice at the Canadian Film Festival and Best Film at the Canadian Film Festival (2012). Most recently, she both directed and edited the online horror mini-series “The Confinement” (2021). She is a member of the Directors Guild of Canada and an associate member of the Canadian Cinema Editors. Jesse has an B.F.A. from Ryerson University's School of Image Arts.

Tyson Sadler is an explorer, traveller and award-winning filmmaker. He has directed video content and documentaries for The New York Times, Associated Press, and The Huffington Post. His films have been screened at festivals around the world including Tribeca Film Festival, South by Southwest, The Edinburgh Fringe Festival, and the Toronto International Film Festival. An early pioneer i virtual reality documentary, he has worked tirelessly to use cutting edge technology to tell stories that build empathy around causes such as climate change, forced migration, and human rights.

Subscribe now

Show Notes:

The Film’s Inception

Industry Polarity

Regulating Travel

Addressing the Root Problems

Greenwashing Animal and Child Welfare Tourism

How the Wealth Gap Increased During COVID

What was Left on the Cutting Room Floor

Homework:

WATCH THE FILM HERE

The Last Tourist Film Website | Instagram | Facebook

The Last Tourist Trailer

Jesse Mann's Website | Instagram

Tyson Sadler’s Website | Instagram

Transcript:

Chris: Welcome Jesse and Tyson to the End of Tourism Podcast.

Jesse: Thanks Chris for having us.

Tyson: Thanks for having us.

Chris: Thank you so much for joining me today to talk about your documentary film, The Last Tourist. So, it was released in 2022 to great reception.

And as you might imagine, many of my listeners have pointed me in its direction. And after watching the film, I found myself really grateful that people finally approached these themes in the medium of documentary filmmaking and with what seemed to be a budget to do justice to what those themes confront.

And so first I'd like to ask you two how The Last Tourist got started and what the inspiration behind the film's creation was and how did you decide to write a treatment for it?

Tyson: Ultimately, you know, I think the inspiration for The Last Tourist came from a combination of personal shared experience and a shared passion for travel and particularly responsible travel.

You know, in early 2018, I was approached [00:01:00] by the executive producers to write a treatment, for a short film around responsible tourism in the country of Peru. And through, you know, some follow up conversations, we sort of quickly realized that we had an opportunity because, a large scale documentary, on the subject of responsible tourism just didn't exist yet.

I mean, we have wonderful films out there which challenge our conversations with our relationship with climate change and our relationship with our food source like An Inconvenient Truth or like Food Inc., but we didn't at that time yet have a documentary which really challenged our perceptions of the global impact of the travel and tourism industry and so over conversations with with our team and the producers we quickly realized that we had a unique opportunity to make "An Inconvenient Truth" for the travel industry and in early 2018, we seized on that opportunity to explore the positive and negative impacts of tourism on destinations.

Jesse: And I think just to add to what Tyson was saying, I think originally [00:02:00] it started off as a short project and yourself and the executive producers who brought us together kind of pushed for it to become the large scale project that had ended up being filmed in 15 different countries or 16 with 400 hours of footage.

So, sometimes you don't know, especially myself as a co-writer and editor, when you come on to a project, in the initial stages, you think, "Oh, you know, this is wonderful. It sounds like a great project." I had been an avid traveler, lived in a few different countries over 20 years and I thought, yeah, this is a story that needs to be told, but I will say in no way in the beginning, did I ever think it was going to be, and I think Tyson didn't either, was it going to be such a huge project.

And you comment, Chris, on the expansiveness of the subject and the different kind of facets of the tourism [00:03:00] industry we were able to look at.

And really I have to say that I'm happy that we got to touch on all those points and to the chagrin of my personal sleep and Tyson's as well, but it started off small, I have to say that, and it grew into something tremendous that I think we're very proud of.

Tyson: It really was a natural progression of our desire to raise awareness about responsible tourism and its consequences. We had our world premiere, honestly, I think it was about two years ago now at the Vancouver International Film Festival, two years ago. And a little over two years ago, a little over two years ago.

And the film is still doing a festival run. Just last weekend, Jesse was at the the Innsbruck Film Festival and it's still been getting a wonderful response, great conversations around it. And we're streaming on platforms around the world, you know, Crave in Canada, Hulu in the U.S., Amazon Prime in other countries. I was just in French Polynesia and was able to find our film on Amazon Prime, which was really delightful [00:04:00] to see that.

Jesse: Yeah, it makes us happy as filmmakers to know that the story that we spent a lot of time trying to create in a way that we thought would connect with audiences worldwide is actually getting out there. And so it's really nice to be speaking to you on your podcast as well and kind of extend that out to potentially more people who haven't seen the film or some who just want to talk more about the topics.

Chris: And I wanted to ask you two, given the fact that the film was released, you know, still very much in a pandemic during the, the COVID 19 times what the reactions were given the fact that tourism had ground to a halt in that time you know, I received a lot of Mail regarding your film, like, ah, you have to check this out.

You have to watch this, right? And so a lot of people really excited about the project, about the film. But then I guess I'm also curious about[00:05:00] if there was much of an industry backlash in regards to the degree of sincerity perhaps around which the film exhibited these kind of deep and sometimes dire consequences that visit themselves on places and people in the name of tourism.

Tyson: Yeah. I think the reactions to the film have been in my experience, almost entirely positive. But people don't come to me with criticism, they come to me with congratulations, but I think there's a lot of individuals in the tourism industry and sponsors that have really welcomed our film, The Last Tourist, as a necessary and eye opening piece of work.

It sparked a lot of interesting conversations and prompted the industry to, in many ways, I think, reevaluate some of their practices. You

Jesse: If we back it up to when we were just when we were meeting with all of the different professionals that we interviewed across the different facets of the tourism industry, I mean, when you and I were writing the story, there were so [00:06:00] many different conflicting opinions on how to solve one issue that we still come across that sometimes when we meet those industry experts outside of, let's say, film audiences.

Because When we were writing it, we had to kind of decide which side of the coin we were going to follow through our story with, and whether it's a topic of let's say regulation, that was a topic that Tyson and I had a lot of conversations about when we were making the film because the industry in itself is kind of very polarized in terms of regulation.

There's some strong proponents within the tourism industry who want regulation. And then there's some who are very against it. And Tyson and I had a lot of conversations about that. And I think we still do when we meet certain industry professionals out there and I think that's a really important topic as well.

[00:07:00] Now that you are bringing up, post covid and the pandemic where we saw kind of what happens when things are shut down. You know, we see both the positive and the negative. I mean we mentioned it in the film, but almost every single person that we interviewed in our film lost their means of income during that time. Gone.

And at the same time, the world experienced kind of you know, a refuge from, you know, airplane emissions and damage to destinations. And, you know, these were calculable things like we could see that this was a definite impact. So, I think there's these kind of topics and these conversations are where we see a lot of polarity.

And I think that we tried our best to focus on the people and the developing nations in our story. But, there are a lot [00:08:00] of stories that were left on the cutting room floor and so it is good to discuss them after in a podcast like this. I know that's kind of a long winded interjection, but I do believe that we do have some polarity for sure Tyson and I have come across, but just not in terms of what Tyson is talking about, in terms of not not so much with the audiences It is more a bit in the industry.

Tyson: I'll share an observation. During the process of creating this film, we interviewed literally dozens of travel experts, you know from academics to tour operators across the industry.

It's universally recognized that responsible tourism and sustainable tourism is a good thing. But then when we dive a little bit deeper I found a very fractured kind of industry because everybody believes that they know how to do responsible tourism, right. And everybody else, often, isn't executing responsible tourism correctly.

And so, on a foundational level, sure, we all believe in responsible tourism, but I think, the approach at how we get there isn't universally accepted, throughout the industry, and I think [00:09:00] that that's, on a basic level, we kind of explore those themes in the film as well as we interview people who kind of take different approaches to how to engage responsibly with tourists and host communities.

Jesse: And we had to make some hard decisions, obviously based on the research that was coming in on what side we wanted to promote in the story. But sometimes I think it's fair to say, Tyson, if you agree with me that we did try to leave it a bit more open for audiences to try to make their own decision based on what we had learned, because it's not always an easy answer for every situation.

It's quite nuanced, I think.

Tyson: Absolutely.

Chris: And you mentioned Jesse, regulation. In terms of the people you interviewed and your research, generally speaking, what does that look like, or what might that look like in particular locales or within the industry?

Jesse: Well, I think we've seen quite a bit of it post pandemic because where we thought there was going to be [00:10:00] an ease back into traveling that has not happened. All the reports are coming back in that tourism is back up in droves and a lot of the same problems, if not more are back with travel again.

And so we've seen places like Machu Picchu has started regulating the amount of people that are able to visit annually. Worldwide, there's different popular tourist destinations who have decided to limit the amount of tourism and tourists that come to certain destinations.

You know, I think when it comes to destinations, we just have to be really careful that it doesn't become a tax that is elitist because that happens a lot with regulation across the board. You've seen it with cigarettes, you've seen it with airfare as well. You're paying a higher price for travel.

And although I do believe personally and Tyson, you [00:11:00] can speak to this as well, but because we haven't discussed this recently, but when you put a strong tariff or tax on travel, I think it is important, but I think it has to be calculated so that it's not elitist because if we only have people traveling in the world who can afford it, if it becomes so unaffordable, this is totally against the core value of travel, which is to unite all people of all different socioeconomic statuses and really connect with different cultures and people, and if it's just suddenly becomes for people who can afford a really overpriced flight, I think that will completely take away the value of the core value of travel.

But I do strongly believe that, and this I think is a very controversial thing to say. I do believe that things have to be regulated and there has to be something done, especially about the amount of flights that are happening on this planet. Because, you know, for instance, I don't know the statistics for Canada, but I was looking at it the other day for[00:12:00] the UK.

And I think something like 70 percent of all flights in the UK are taken by 15 percent of the population, and I don't doubt that that's very similar for a lot of the Western world without knowing all the statistics specifically, so I think that that has to be really taken into consideration when putting out regulation in terms of flights or destinations and such.

Chris: Yeah, I've thought about it quite a bit as well, and the elitization of travel, and this understanding that, well, we remove subsidies, for example, for air travel or other things, that we'll just have rich people flying around the world, which is more often than not the case already. Most flights are undertaken for business travel and that's a huge thing that I think most people don't know about, but instead of getting people with corporate backed funds or just rich people flying around the world, we're obviously looking for people with strong principles and good behavior to be the ones [00:13:00] traveling.

But then how do you measure that? How do you quantify that in a way that honors the kinds of worlds we want to live in? And it's not just this like, oh, it's impossible. Sure. And we could take that understanding that to quantify such a thing would be next to impossible, but then it could also open up these kind of doors of imagination where in like what kind of infrastructures would we want to put in place that were not maybe Government sanctioned or not maybe top down, but actually from the bottom up, creating these kind of international or intercultural bonds and practices between people that would allow not just for the kinds of people who locals in quote unquote "destinations" want to receive to be able to travel, but then also to create the conditions whereby that kind of, for lack of a better word, behavior or principles could be deepened in the world.

I mean, it'd be extremely difficult to, [00:14:00] to manage, but How would you quantify that? How would you measure that?

Jesse: Yeah, and I think that's such a, such a complicated issue and I love what you're saying though. I think it's absolutely wonderful. And I do think it's possible to move in that direction.

I'm not sure I have the answer for that and maybe Tyson wants to speak to it, but I also want to say that something that I think could be part of the solution is also promoting train travel as well. And I know that that kind of that stops at domestic. But at the same time, you know, I think governments should be allocating a lot of funds to push train travel to create and develop train travel and to also subsidize train travel more because it's just a wonderful way to reduce emissions and to actually continue allowing people to travel.

Tyson: Yeah. There are some countries here in Europe, Jesse, and I think Europe is just far beyond a lot of the rest of the world. Canada, I think we're still living in the dark ages, you know, when it comes to long [00:15:00] distance train travel.

Jesse: That's a shame. It hasn't been made a priority.

Tyson: It just doesn't exist.

Chris: Well, I'm curious also for you two how your own travels in your lives might have come to bear on your production or pre production and research in the film. Maybe you could tell us a little bit of how you've seen the world over the course of your life and your travels and if that came to bear at all in the making of the film.

Tyson: Personally for me, I traveled extensively, for 20 years prior to embarking on this film. I worked in the travel industry. I worked for an airline for many years. I was also a journalist and I've done work for several large publications, which allowed me to travel to very, some very remote and exotic destinations around the world.

This travel really exposed me to the beauty and the wonder of the world. But also the environmental and the cultural challenges that a lot of these destinations face. You know, the experiences, with travel for both work and for pleasure, I think they served as a [00:16:00] catalyst, for me just to delve deeper into this topic.

And so when I was approached about directing and writing a film on this topic, I don't think there could have been a better fit. Like it just, everything just kind of fell into place and I just felt like I was really well poised because prior to that I had traveled to 70 different countries in a number of different capacities.

I had personally engaged in a number of behaviors that we are critical of in the film in terms of animal interaction, you know, interaction with other cultures. And my travel through two decades was really an eye opening and learning experience for me. And what this film really is, I think for me and in many points in the film is a reflection of my past travels and things that have been illuminated in my mind in terms of what are some important aspects that we really need to address if we want to be more conscious and responsible travelers.

Jesse: And I think from my end I surely [00:17:00] had not traveled to as many destinations as Tyson. But I did indulge my wanderlust in my twenties and thirties. I lived in a few different countries, Holland, South Africa, Germany, Canada. And I think that the absolute best aspect for me personally of travel is meeting the people.

I absolutely love meeting people in different cultures and seeing the differences and the similarities and learning the wisdom as much as I possibly can in such a moment of my life, when I'm in a destination, if it grants me such a gift. And I think from that, I still do have such a deep, deep gratitude to my privilege and being able to travel in and meet such people.

I've made such beautiful friendships over the course of 20 years and many I still keep in touch with across the various places I've lived. And I think that when you come back, [00:18:00] perhaps from living in different cultures in different countries and you come back to your home, the place you were raised in and where you were born and where you were raised culturally, and you can note the vast differences, and it's not a negative thing, but you start to pick up on the ways in which many people can see different cultures or different countries in a way that is completely disconnected from the actual truth and and this knowledge often comes with privilege.

I was privileged enough to be able to travel to these destinations to meet certain people and to dissuade certain prejudices, but not everyone can. And so part of this film, I have to say, ironically, is that if you can't travel, this film is also a wonderful film to watch because it's something that you can meet these people [00:19:00] in these destinations.

You know, there's so many places that I've been to also that are so many places I have not been to that were featured in the film as well. And with documentary filmmaking and making, and especially as an editor, I really do feel like I get to know these people so well, and I don't think that's just exclusive to myself.

I think audiences, hopefully, if I've done it correctly, if Tyson and I have, have made the film correctly, that these people's hearts have come through in the film. And, this is something that Tyson and I really worked hard on. And I'm sorry if I'm deviating from the question a bit, but it does connect very deeply to my love of travel is is people and also my love of editing people and so it was something we worked really hard to focus on is how do we give these people a podium.

They have their voice there. They're saying their truths. How do we give them a podium [00:20:00] and as the white filmmakers who are coming into different countries, how do we take a step back and really let them preach their wisdom? And so it was a balance for us really in finding the right voices, obviously speaking to the right professionals and speaking to professionals within different cultures that you see featured in the film and really making sure that their knowledge, their voice, their direction was giving us direction on how we edited and formulated the story and stories of everyone that we met in the travels of the production as well.

Chris: And on that note, I'm curious for each of you, what was the most important topic or theme that came up in the film for you personally?

Tyson: For me, maybe it's an echo of Jesse's sentiments there, but really it comes down to the impact on the communities that so graciously host us when we when we do travel. Travel you know has you know has an encyclopedia [00:21:00] of challenges that come with traveling responsibly unless we address the people. And I think we address this and the the film addresses this, but we can't begin to you know to start focusing on the environment unless we first focus on the communities who are there and helping them emerge from poverty. We can't begin to focus on how we can solve the problem of poaching in the African savannah unless we first address the root causes of why it's there and how it affects the host communities and how poverty affects people's decisions to be involved in this trade.

Jesse: That was something that Jane Goodall was was really adamant about speaking in the film about as well

Tyson: Yeah, and so to answer your question Chris, I mean ultimately it comes down to the communities and the people, the humanity of it all. First, we need to address the human aspect and then we can address the secondary aspects of what it means to be a responsible traveler.[00:22:00]

Jesse: So for me, personally, the most incredible voices in the film that when they came in, I just thought, "oh, wow," were definitely Lek from Elephant Nature Park and one of our contacts in Kenya Judy Kefergona, who ended up being one of the main speakers and narrators throughout a huge portion of our film.

These two women were just heroes. Like just with Judy, with the words that she was able to express for the people working in not just only the tourism industry in Kenya, but the people of Kenya who were vulnerable to unethical tourism, and then speaking to so many different subjects that were connected to so many different stories worldwide with such eloquence and such power and such knowledge [00:23:00] and encourage really, I think.

She spoke about these topics. I was just enamored, just blown away and so grateful for her coming onto our film and Lek Chailart is just a modern day hero. She is the tiniest woman with the biggest heart who when I saw her story in our film against the backdrop of these beautiful giants, these elephants that she has rescued. And essentially she's an elephant whisperer in the truest sense of the word. And it's just such a magical thing to see.

Listeners won't be able to understand this. I'm getting goosebumps when I just talk about her and this was the kind of thing that when Tyson and I were looking through footage and looking through stories that we were looking for, "Oh, that's the moment, ah! the moment. I got the goosebumps. That's it. It's there.

And we found it in the stories, not just these two women, everyone you see featured in the story and some that were left on the cutting room floor, unfortunately there that gave us beautiful insight that we still used in crafting the story, that just wasn't able to [00:24:00] make it into the actual film for timing constraints.

But really, I would have to say that these two, it's not specifically the stories, although both of them touch on really important stories, including child welfare and animal welfare, which to me, those two stories were really close to my heart. And we felt really strongly that they needed a really important part in the film.

But it was really these two women who I just felt so grateful for in the film.

Chris: I mean, the, the chapter on animal welfare was quite devastating for me in part because it had reminded me that in my early twenties, I had visited Thailand and I had gone to an elephant sanctuary. Not a zoo but a sanctuary, and had the opportunity to ride an elephant for a short time, and I felt really uncomfortable probably because I was on top of an elephant, just the kind of immediate awkwardness of such a thing, having never seen one in person, having never [00:25:00] experienced that before, but also kind of like, "what am I doing here?" And so, that part of the film really kind of opened up for me why I felt that perhaps existential discomfort, not just about being on top of an animal of that size, but in the context of the dynamic, you around how that was happening and why that was happening and not having the context for it so long ago.

And of course, this is one of the things that we touch on in the episodes, in the interviews, in the podcast, is how can we come to understand these things when our visits are so short in these places, when we are only in a place for just a very brief time and there's really no context for the history and the culture and the political dynamics that surround these things.

And then, most travelers, most tourists just end up leaving and the consequence of one's presence on the scene is kind of forgotten, at least by the tourist or traveler. Yeah, so thank you for [00:26:00] for that.

Jesse: That question did come up actually at the recent screening of the film in Innsbruck at the Nature Film Festival, whereas someone in the audience asked very specifically, even though it would be great to stay at a destination for a long time, most people are, saving up for short travel when they have time off work. And they need to take this kind of tour because they can only afford this one. And what do you say to those people who want to travel better, but feel like they're kind of stuck or don't know where to go.

But I would say in short, I think that touches on an issue that we have in the modern world with a lot of things. We are all overtired, overworked, and we don't have time to be ethical, we don't have time to do the research, we don't have time to investigate, if anything is against our core values, and we don't have time to and I get that, you know, it's not easy for everybody.

And if you do have the [00:27:00] time and you are able to really do a deep dive then you're very privileged, because you have the time, which just means that you have the money. So we did try to give a lot of smaller tips at the end of the film in terms of how you can do smaller acts of, of kindness and of conscious traveling, to travel local, to put money into local economies to make sure that you're not requesting your sheets to be washed every day, making sure that you're traveling using reusable, to make sure that you're and I guess this goes into a little bit more of the extensive questioning is to ask the destination that you're traveling to what their policies are in connection with the locals, in connections with the environment.

Unfortunately, there is a lot of greenwashing in tourism. And you know, that's in all industries right now worldwide. So it's not going to be so easy for someone who isn't an investigative [00:28:00] journalist to really find out the truth behind it all the time, but we can do our best.

And there are quite a few links on the website thelasttouristfilm.com where you can see some of the different organizations that we spoke with that have lists upon lists of different collaborating companies that you can look to that can can show you places that are not greenwashing or that are working with locals, but back to the idea of taking the time and it is about taking the time, whether it's an hour even, just to take the time and do a bit of research and this especially comes back to the topic of child welfare and people who are still, en masse, volunteering worldwide to orphanages and orphanages where children have existing family members and that these orphanages have become of monetary value to developing nations [00:29:00] because they make money and it's really easy for us to pass judgment on places that do this, and it's definitely wrong, but if we as travelers are going there and saying with our travel dollars, this is something we want to invest in, then people in developing nations are going to say, this is how I make money.

And it's the same with animal welfare. You pay for an animal sanctuary that you haven't done the research on. They're going to keep perpetuating that cycle. It's going to be the same with child welfare. So, if you do want to be ethical, you have to fit in a little bit of research in your travel time. And that's it. And I know it's not so easy for everybody.

Tyson: Yeah, I'd like to expand a little bit on a theme that sort of both of you have talked about. Jessie, you had mentioned greenwashing. Chris, you had mentioned that you had been to an elephant sanctuary in Thailand. One of the most memorable takeaways that I had from this film is just the massive amount of greenwashing [00:30:00] and deception that exists within the industry.

I came to know a lot of companies that appeared to just be normal travel companies doing the same thing that has been going on in the travel industry but marketing "green" although nothing really changes. It's just their marketing strategy that's changed. If we look at, for example, in Thailand, there are a number of places that call themselves an elephant sanctuary, an elephant retirement home, an elephant rescue center.

And we can't rely on those names anymore to know that the service provider is giving us an ethical experience. We really need to ask deeper questions. It's the trend in the industry now to use this type of language, " sustainable," "responsible," "eco," all of these buzzwords.

And I've just come to find these completely meaningless, in those terms. We really need to ask some deeper, more challenging questions of these experiences and the tour operators and the service providers to actually know whether what they're doing is ethical or not because it is very easy to call yourself a [00:31:00] sanctuary, when in fact, it's the complete opposite. If it truly was an elephant sanctuary, we wouldn't be able to ride the elephants, in that place and they would be providing them a life of dignity free from exploitation.

And it's the same with children. Calling these places orphanages ,I think it's a misnomer. It's incorrect. You know, 70 percent of children who live in these quote unquote "orphanages" actually have at least one living parent.

But it's all under the guise of trying to gain sympathy from the traveler. "Oh, come see an elephant at a retirement home. Come see a child at an orphanage." It's just a piece of marketing that doesn't reflect the truth. We have a lot of companies doing the same unethical practices they've been doing for decades.

However, they've just really changed their marketing to appear more green.

Chris: Yeah, it seems to be a never ending cycle where responsible isn't good enough, that now we got to be regenerative. So many of these words just end up becoming, marketing tools.

Tyson: I'm hearing that word a [00:32:00] lot more these days as well.

Chris: Yeah, so how do we proceed, not just with a degree of dedication towards research and, and and planning, but also deep discipline as to how these words are unfortunately, as you said, becoming kind of meaningless in their significance..

I want to take a little turn with you both to ask about what happened as the film was going through post production and its release because most of the footage that you have is quote unquote pre pandemic and the COVID 19 pandemic hit, obviously, in 2020 and from what I understand your team was entering into the post production process and, of course, tourism ground to a halt almost completely, worldwide.

And throughout the film, there are people that you two interview that contend with the consequences and context of tourism and look [00:33:00] to a more honorable path that it might take. But I'm curious in regards to the people that you did interview who had found a degree of success and perhaps within a more small scale, a more honorable way of doing tourism that those flights, those trains, the reception of people in their villages went from a hundred to zero, basically overnight.

So much of the dire consequences of tourism revolve around or end up as exile, local people can't afford to produce food anymore in their places. And the education systems kind of move them towards getting jobs in the next city or even in other countries, and I'm curious in the context of the film and I guess the treatment that you put forward, you know, never perhaps thinking that something like this could happen. What was the fallout among the people that you interviewed in regards to their understandings of tourism and if it was [00:34:00] still this kind of for lack of a better word, golden goose or calf or sacred cow that they could rely on for the rest of their lives.

What did you hear kind of in the ether as you were doing that post production?

Tyson: I think it substantially expanded the wealth gap. I think during COVID the people that were hit the hardest are the people in the tourism industry that often are paid the least.

Depending on what their jobs were, they were the ones who were suffering layoffs and they were the ones whose businesses couldn't afford to sustain themselves. And so I think, for the most vulnerable populations, the pandemic was absolutely devastating.

People couldn't afford to put food on the table and pay rents, not just, I think, in developing countries, but even in the developed world. Airlines were laying off massive amounts of employees. Hotels were cutting staff. This was a global challenge that affected everyone.

However, at that same time, we did hear stories that, you know, CEOs of major airlines were taking million dollar bonuses[00:35:00] for cutting costs. And that was an observation of mine, through that experience, you know, that the people who needed tourism the most for daily sustenance and to put bread on the table were the ones who were absolutely the most affected and the people kind of at the top of the tourism industry were still fine and they were also taking bonuses, which really bothered me just because the wealth gap just seemed to get further and further apart through that.

But we do know, with the stories, that were featured in our film... there's a wonderful lodge in Ecuador, a homestay that we look at and they lost their income during that time.

The elephant sanctuary in Thailand, the one that does do great work, not one that greenwashes an elephant sanctuary but they lost a lot of revenue where it was very challenging to feed the elephants and to house the elephants because they didn't have that revenue coming in to support the project.

Jesse: We were hearing in in Africa, right?

Some of the rangers [00:36:00] were who were placed in defense of the elephants and animals and rhinos and such were just gone. They just weren't there anymore at that time because if they're not getting paid, they can't stay there. And so poaching also went up in those areas as well.

But you know, I think that in terms of what the positive was, I think a lot of people were hoping that post COVID that there was going to be hope for change, for renewal for doing things differently. And I think this was in when we were in post that this was maybe, potential to show people how things can be different by showing kind of the polar opposite and the effect and also showing how intrinsically connected people's livelihoods are to this industry and how vulnerable they are to massive change like this. I mean, the Dominican Republic that has [00:37:00] almost 90 percent of their GDP related to tourism?

Tyson: Island nations are the ones who are most affected by tourism. You know, the Bahamas, the Dominican Republic. The Caribbean islands specifically. I don't know if it's as high as 90%, but the vast majority of their GDP from island nations comes from the travel and tourism industry, and they were certainly hit the hardest during the pandemic.

Jesse: And so I think that we can see from that, I think the hope for us during post production was, okay, you know, this is a horrific blow to the people most vulnerable in this industry, but if we can get this message out after the pandemic, perhaps this could be something that could really change. And to be fair, change is slow sometimes and I mean, it's wishful thinking that post pandemic right after that suddenly everyone was going to become ethical travelers but I see so much potential just in the discussions online the people that we're [00:38:00] meeting at different screenings, the interest that we're getting worldwide, just to have these conversations and see that there is an interest in change.

And when you talk about moving change, it does often come from the people, and I think, across the world over the past few decades, we've all been seeing again, I think our power as people, as citizens, as individuals, and the power that we have to come together over certain issues that we feel need radical change and even if it is slow change, I do see the inklings of that change happening within the tourism industry and I think it's really positive.

Tyson: You still have a lot of work ahead of us.

Chris: Amen. I think that's really, really important and, and perhaps fits properly inside of the context of the dominant culture, at least of North America or the quote unquote West, wherein, the pandemic also produced a deepening of the [00:39:00] culture of "everything now."

Suddenly it was like, "okay, well, I can't go out here, so everything has to be deliverable, and at the tip of your fingers, right? And what might come with that is this notion that, we also expect social change to happen overnight. Right? And that it might be overshadowed by this kind of dominant culture of wanting everything now and also the unwillingness to do the necessary work, which is sometimes generational.

Right? Not just a week or a month or a year, but generations.

In that regard, the themes of the film are extremely broad and you go into a lot of detail and depth with each. So I'm very grateful for that, but I'm also curious what might've gotten left out.

What might, one day end up on a director's cut of the film.

Jesse: Oh, so much.

Tyson: Ask the editor.

Jesse: Oh. Well, I mean, you had so many stories that you brought [00:40:00] to the table that were beautiful, beautiful stories. Forgive me. I don't remember his name and you'll remember Tyson.

But one of the.

Tyson: I know who you're talking about.

Jesse: Oh, do you? One of the men you interviewed at the UN had a really beautiful story to tell. And then we also had a really beautiful story from Costa Rica. An animal welfare and environmental story. Oh, my goodness. There were so many stories.

Tyson: We had a wonderful story from Cusco Peru with an organization that was putting the first female porters on the Inca Trail and really fighting for gender equality on the Inca Trail.

Jesse: What was that company's name again, Tyson? Well, the reason why I bring it up is because it's so unique that I just think, "oh, we should definitely highlight that to listeners" because they were taking female porters and they were reorganizing the whole industry based on their [00:41:00] precedent because they were treating porters with dignity, with safe conditions, with, valuable wages and this is something that's just not done across the industry on the Inca Trail with the male porters and there was some really, really horrific footage that we came across of the way these porters were living just not too far from where the tourists were sleeping comfortably in their tents. And this is a wide practice across the industry and Miguel from this company Evolution Treks and the gallon, do you remember his full name, tyson?

Tyson: Miguel Angel Gongora

Jesse: from Evolution Treks, yeah, a wonderful, wonderful man who was really, really passionate about changing the industry. And we spoke with many of the female porters, and yeah, that was a story that we were really, really sad to lose that [00:42:00] story.

Tyson: Yeah. Yeah. With only 90 minutes, you know, we yeah, really had to make some challenging decisions on what to be included in the film and I really feel that a 90 minute film can scratch the surface, it can spark some interest in a number of these themes, but certainly, and maybe that's next steps for us, but I certainly think that what this the subject matter, deserves is a series, you know, cause we could dive much deeper.

Jesse: Tyson and I have been talking about it.

Tyson: Yeah, we, we can dive much deeper into each of these subjects and create a 90 minute doc on each of them. And so, at some point in the future, we'll be making some pitches and writing some additional treatments into how we can make a six part series and expand on the themes in this film, you know, from the environment to gender inequality to animal welfare and everything deserves a lot more time, but hopefully, what we've done with this film is just been able to spark a number of conversations and inspire people to go and do some additional research [00:43:00] into how these themes impact these communities.

Chris: Yeah, well, thank you both so much for that. I have a lot more questions, but maybe that'll also be saved for a sequel.

Jesse: Yeah, we'd love to speak to you again, Chris, if you'd like, in the future.

Chris: That'd be great. Before we finish, I'd like to ask you what might be next for you two in your respective filmmaking and writing lives?

Tyson: My world currently revolves around photographing wildlife particularly large wildlife. Yeah, I've been spending a lot of time traveling recently and in the ocean. I mentioned to you, I mean, tomorrow I'm hopping on a flight and I'm heading to Norway to go photograph large marine mammals in Norway. So that's that's where my life is taking me right now is in pursuit of wildlife filmmaking and photography.

Jesse: Although I wish I could, I could say similarly, I right now my life is a little bit calmer. I had a baby 20 months ago. So, I've been on an extended maternity leave [00:44:00] and I'm currently just in development of projects for the future.

I finished up this project in full right before my child was born. And I still have a few projects that were finished up recently, but as of the moment I'm completely in development and yeah, I really look forward to developing something with Tyson in the future in regards to what he was talking about a series on travel and on a lot of stories that we were so passionate and so blessed to come across, but that we just didn't have the ability to give the podium to in our film, but yeah, so I'm really excited for the future and just coming from this festival that I was at recently, I'm just so invigorated with the energy of the audiences and the passion to travel better and to demand better travel from the industry and from travelers as a whole. So this just really gives me a lot of hope.

Chris: Well, congratulations on your [00:45:00] motherhood. Thank you. And having a little one in your life and this work and Tyson and the opportunity to be able to travel as you do, and to try to honor the lives of those beautiful four leggeds and no leggeds and the tailed and finned ones. So finally, how can our listeners watch The Last Tourist? Are there any screenings coming up?

Jesse: Definitely on the website, thelasttouristfilm.com, right when you go to the webpage, there's a whole list of all the different avenues you can watch the film.

But maybe Tyson could elaborate more.

Tyson: Absolutely. Yeah, you can connect with us on Instagram at Last Tourist Film, as well. We're just kind of wrapping up the fall festival season before we do some additional screenings next spring. We just wrapped up in Germany and Iceland.

I think streaming is the best way to find us, in Canada we're streaming on Crave. In the United States, we're streaming on Hulu. Delta Airlines, Emirates Airlines. In other countries around the world, you can also find us, I [00:46:00] know in France, in French Polynesia, Hong Kong on Amazon Prime. And there's a number of other markets that the film will be opening in very shortly which is really exciting.

It's not available everywhere, unfortunately, around the world, but if you have a desire to see it, you know, please get in touch with us and we'll do our best to make sure that you have an opportunity to see the film. You can host a private screening. There's a number of ways that you can see this film, but please let's keep the conversation going.

Let's get in touch. I'd love to hear from a number of the listeners, and let's find a way that we can allow everyone to see this film.

Jesse: And what's been really exciting is we've got a lot of interest from schools. So, educational screenings have been happening all across the world, and that's just been amazing.

Those are the best for us, I think. And I would just say, if any of the listeners have any further questions for us, we're always open to taking questions and chatting. Personally, Tyson and I can both be reached at our Instagram. So you can I think Tyson's is @TysonSadler, and mine is [00:47:00] @JesseMann, two S's, two N's. So if you want to leave that for your listeners, they're welcome to contact us. And anyone who's listening can contact us directly that way, who want to host a screening or find out ways to watch.

Chris: Absolutely. Yeah, I'll make sure that all the websites and handles are available for our listeners at theendoftourism. com.

And on behalf of them on behalf of myself, I'd like to thank you both for joining me today. Your film is incredibly inspirational, necessary, and deeply important for these times and I don't doubt that our listeners think the same. So, I wish you the most beautiful paths ahead on your travels with your families.

And ...We get the opportunity to speak again sometime.

Tyson: Thank you, Chris. This has really been a meaningful conversation. Thank you.

Jesse: Yeah. Thank you so much for giving us this space and I wish you all the same.

Chris: My pleasure.

Leave a comment

Subscribe now

S5 #7 | The Dreamwork of Instagram w/ Sean P. Smith

Chris Christou — Thu, 18 Jul 2024 14:29:53 GMT

On this episode, my guest is Sean P. Smith, an Assistant Professor in the Department of Culture Studies at Tilburg University in the Netherlands. Much of his research has focused on the relationship between social media and tourism, and how colonial histories shape today’s ideologies and visual cultures of travel. The inequalities that result from many forms of tourism development, he argues, are intimately linked with how tourists create content for Instagram, TikTok, and YouTube, and the ways tourists frame themselves in landscapes and alongside local residents often replay colonial hierarchies.

Subscribe now

Show Notes:

Why Study Instagram?

The Pre-tour Narrative (Edward Bruner, Raul Salazar)

The Habitus of Tourism (or How We Got Here)

The Promontory Witness (or that photo)

The Logic of Influence

Emptying the Landscape (John Urry)

The Techno-Generational Divide

Media Ecology

Other Horizons in Oman

Homework:

Sean P. Smith - Tilburg University

Sean P. Smith: Twitter / X | Instagram | Google Scholar (Articles)

Transcript:

Chris: [00:00:00] Welcome, Sean, to the pod. Thank you so much for being willing to join us to speak about your work.

Sean: Thanks very much for having me.

Chris: My pleasure. I'm curious, Sean where you're speaking from today and, and how the world is, how the world might be housing you there.

Sean: Well, it's very rainy and dark. I'm in the Southern Netherlands, an area called North Brebant, where I just moved less than a month ago.

So, in many places of moving around, if so, getting used to this one.

Chris: Sean, I found out about your work from one of the pod's listeners who sent in a link to one of your academic articles entitled, Instagram Abroad, Performance, Consumption, and Colonial Narrative in Tourism. Now, I've been ruminating on the effect that social media has on tourism, spectacle, surveillance, and cultures of disposability for a long time now.

So I'm really excited to speak with you today. And [00:01:00] likewise parts of the podcast are shared via Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, so there's always this sense of kind of feeding the machine. unaware and perhaps more aware each time. And so first then, I'm curious why focus on Instagram in the context of critical tourism studies? What makes it different from say Facebook or Twitter?

Sean: Yeah, that's a really good question Chris. I think with Instagram, in many contexts around the world, certainly not universally, but it's the social media platform that is most readily identified with not just tourism, but the way that people represent themselves engaging in tourism. It's very image driven.

Of course, people do write captions, they do engage in other forms of storytelling, but nowadays it's mostly pictures and especially reels, arguably in the last few years. And for a long time, this [00:02:00] has been could almost say the dream work of tourism going back 200, maybe longer years. So even though today, I think you can find forms of tourism well represented TikTok to varying degrees on Facebook.

Instagram, at least in many of the places where I've conducted research, is the place that one goes to both learn about places to travel and also to show how oneself travels.

Chris: And I'm kind of imagining that we're more or less in the same age range, but I'm curious if on your travels, you mentioned just briefly that you had also spent time backpacking as a younger person and I'm curious if Instagram existed at the time and also if this dream work was evident to you in your travels.

Sean: It was. I think I was relatively young when I got my first [00:03:00] smartphone, but certainly not as young as people nowadays. I must have been maybe 22 or 23. So I did have some years of traveling before I think Instagram really reshaped the way that tourism is done, not just for people that actually use this app, but regardless of whether or not anyone's ever downloaded it on their phone, I think Instagram has had a significant impact on the way that tourism is done.

So when I first got a smartphone, I was in a period of my life where I was able to travel quite frequently and that was something that I was really pursuing at the time. And Instagram was a way that I was able to engage in a long running interest in photography, but also kind of a diary of where I had been, but certainly one that was legible and sort of visible to other people.

And it was through that, you could say "performance" of travel that began to think a bit more critically about this app and other social media [00:04:00] platforms as well. And the way that it was reshaping tourism destinations.

Chris: Mm. Mm. Yeah, you mention in your work this notion of the pre tour narrative.

And I'm wondering if we could unpack that a little bit for our listeners and what part Instagram plays in this pre tour narrative.

Sean: Yeah, I'm very happy to point that out, because I think this is, this is an important way to think about tourism, and that particular phrase I'm drawing on the work of Edward Bruner, who was an American anthropologist.

And that's also been picked up in other realms to be identified as what other people have called tourism imaginaries, such as in the work of Raúl Salazar. So what this concept of the pre-tour narrative describes is that before people travel to a particular destination, they are exposed to [00:05:00] various forms of representation.

And oftentimes this is very image based or narrative based. So we would see this maybe thinking back in the era before social media, images encountered in magazines and films, perhaps novels, other forms of storytelling, such as just talking with people who have been to places that one wants to travel.

However, in social media, as it's become more integral to the way that people conduct their everyday lives, let alone traveling. It's become the dominant engine for the way that the pre tour narrative is formed. Many people who use Instagram as a space to learn about places to travel, they will encounter images of these of these places on this app or and not just sort of the way that it's portrayed, but what people do in these spaces, the people that live [00:06:00] in the places they're going to visit. So, this process of the formation of a pre tour narrative has really always been a part of tourism. But I think it perhaps it's if not accelerated, then certainly taken a bit of a different form with the advent of social media.

Chris: So on some level, it's not just the question of what you're going to go see, but also how you're going to see it, how you're going to stand in front of that tower or restaurant and see, experience, what's there.

Sean: Yeah, that's a really good way to put it.

Chris: And I know it's a little early in the interview, but I'd like to jump into the heart of the matter and your critiques, if we can. You know, you wrote this incredible article Landscapes for Likes, capitalizing on travel with Instagram. And, in that article, you wrote that, deep breath,

"Instagram's networked architecture and affordances produce three [00:07:00] outcomes that circulate and magnify utterances about travel to a degree impossible in pre-networked media.

One, a mediated travel habitus hegemonically informs prevailing aesthetic norms.

Two, the scalability of embodied performances entrench the motif's narrative underpinnings.

And three, the monetizable market of Instagram encourages neoliberal notions of the branded self."

Now that's a beautiful mouthful. And so I'm wondering, if you might be willing and able to flesh out these three outcomes for our listeners.

Sean: No, that's brilliant. And it's nice to talk about these things, perhaps when they're written that can be quite a bit denser.

So maybe we can start with the first idea, this mediated travel habitus. And with the word habitus, I'm trying on the work of [00:08:00] the French sociologist Pierre Bourdieu, who theorizes he's talking about class and culture and ways that people display their belonging within a particular class.

And the reason that I'm looking to Bordeaux here is tourism and travel, really, it's important to look at this as a practice that has been connected to what Bordeaux might call the pursuit of distinction, to the search for an acquisition of cultural goods. You know, we might think of cultural goods as being a painting or a taste and a particular kind of music, clothes, certain way of speaking even. And when one amasses certain, certain cultural goods, and they're recognized as being part of the upper classes, being marks of somebody who is [00:09:00] sophisticated, somebody who is typically from a fairly privileged financial background, these cultural goods are desirable.

So, this background I think is important because tourism from its modern beginnings in the 18th century has been obtaining these experiences and often physical artifacts that can be a way of claiming a certain social status. So, maybe you've discussed this in other podcasts already, but, when the Grand Tour began in the 1600s, but really took off in the 1700s there was this process in which the aristocratic men, young men, were sent on a tour around Europe, and they would go to capitals like Paris, later Vienna, and then especially places like Rome, and, where they could encounter the remnants of the Roman Empire and classical learning.

[00:10:00] And this was meant to do a few things in the first sense. It was meant to introduce them other parts of the world, to certain historical understandings. They could refine their Latin. They could get better at French and then they could go home and be recognized as a sophisticated member of the aristocracy. And this practice really became quite popular up until about the turn of the 19th century, when it stopped briefly because of wars on the European continent, and then after the Napoleonic Wars ended, it basically exploded.

So when we think about over tourism now in 2023, this was, you know, 1815, 1820s, and this was a period where all of a sudden there were more tourists than ever before.

And what that meant is this practice, which had only been done [00:11:00] by the wealthiest classes, was now something that the middle classes could engage in and that produced a kind of anxiety, where how was one able to become a distinguished or sophisticated traveller. How was one able to obtain the cultural goods provided by travel if everyone was doing it?

So, the habitus of tourism, the kind of implicitly learned practices and sensibilities that developed during the Grand Tour experienced this period of challenge where people had to look for a way to find distinction by other means. And I think this beginning led to this friction where now you see people who are trying to go places that no other tourists go, trying to take pictures that no other tourists have taken, trying to be the only person in a picture of a [00:12:00] famous place. So this way of understanding how to be a tourist has become enshrined in the kinds of images that we see in a space like, like Instagram to the extent where I think these images are circulating the ideologies of tourism.

The scalability refers to, in social media studies, the way in which a single image can achieve a degree of circulation that is not really possible in pre-networked media. So, by networked media, we can think of platforms like Instagram. We can think of Twitter, anything where the possibility of likes and retweets or reposts achieves a degree of visibility what we might call going viral.

So what I was writing about in that article was this particular composition called the "promontory witness" where you have typically one [00:13:00] person who's standing on a promontory or we can say the edge of a cliff the top of a building, in front of a waterfall and they're looking really, really small as compared to the vast scale of nature.

And people see these images and they understand through the mediation, the widespread circulation of these images, that this means something important about travel. This is what I mean by the mediated habitus of travel, that taking an image like this and being a person in a promontory witness image has a particular value. It is a way of claiming distinction, again, in Rodrigo's terms. And by taking a promontory witness image, one is able to circulate that image on Instagram in a very different way than before the social media platform existed. So, you know, we think about images circulated in tourism before Instagram.

It would either be, say, in a family photo album. That people used to have projectors. [00:14:00] People used to maybe send holiday pictures to family and friends, basically whoever they could, you know, show it to, but this is a really, really small circulation, unless somebody was able to get an image in a magazine or some sort of formal publication. But what really shifts with scalable social media is that somebody can take an image and there really is the potential to go viral.

I think in Instagram, the potential to have an image seen by a really significant number of people is less than on a platform like Tik Tok. But there remains the possibility if I post a promontory witness image and I put a geo tag in a place that is particularly trendy at this, at this moment and I put the right hashtags that thousands of people can witness this image and because of that possibility, I think there's a degree of enlistment, a degree of interest in [00:15:00] participating in this trend because taking a promontory witness picture is going to have much more possibility of going viral of leveraging these architectures, these scalable architectures.

Much more so than if it just take, if I take another image that isn't so popular on a platform like Instagram.

Chris: Thank you. Thank you, Sean. Yeah. So there's, there's a lot in there I'm going to come back to in just a little bit. But I wanted to just finish off this one last part because you kind of, you know, mentioned it a little bit.

The monetizable market of Instagram that encourages neoliberal notions of the brand itself. And, you know, I pulled this, this other sentence from one of your articles where you write that

"as a banal mediator of travel and tourism, Instagram can encourage tourists to imagine themselves as a capital generating brand."

Sean: It's really a comment on the attention economy structure of social media platforms, [00:16:00] where I want people to see my pictures and I want to get likes.

And I say that very much as being somebody who continues to study social media and tourism from a critical angle. When I post something I'm always aware of how it's going to be received. Some part of me, even when I'm very aware of the issues with thinking this way potentially is I always want it to gain more visibility.

If I post something and it has less likes than something I posted previously, this will likely incur some degree of thinking, what did I do wrong? What could I have done differently? You know, maybe I'm just produced such interesting content. And what I think is really taking place there is that we're constantly thinking about ways to achieve visibility in a way that is not dissimilar to the kind of negotiation that celebrities and [00:17:00] other public figures have to go through when managing their, what we might in today's terms, call their brand, where because there is always this metric of how popular one is or how visible one is in the form of likes or in the form of reposts or retweets or what have you it's means that we develop a way of always orienting towards this possible public. We're always thinking about the people that are going to see whatever kind of thing we say online, and we, I think much of the time, are hoping that it's going to be received.

If not, you know, people are going to like it, if it is going to maybe change the way that people think about something, if it's going to influence them in some way. And Instagram, of course, is like other social media platforms, is monetizable in the sense that when one gets a lot of followers, you know, if I continually create fantastic travel content and I get tens of thousands or more followers, then [00:18:00] that means that I am able to start making money from it. I'm going to be paid by different companies to come and stay at a resort or go on some sort of guided tour and take an image or make a reel of this experience and post it on Instagram, talk about how great it was, and then tag the company.

And that's a way of them bringing in business. This is how advertising works. So, people become advertisers. But even before that influencer level, I think those of us who are not influencers, and I am certainly not, there's a degree to which we are participating in this logic because even if we don't have any designs of becoming influencers, we still want our posts to be liked and this ultimately influences not just posts we make, but the kind of traveling we do and the kind of relationship we have with the places to which we travel.

Hmm.

Chris: Well [00:19:00] contentious at the very least. But thank you for that, Sean, for being able to flesh that out for us. And I'd like to return back to this notion of the promontory witness, and you know, because even before Instagram I remember seeing in my backpacking years, these same photos, right?

The photo of the person, of their back to the camera facing the open horizon, you know, whether it be a cliff face or a desert or whatever it is, and spreading their hands or arms and, just this kind of emanating freedom, I guess.

But you also mentioned that this kind of perspective, if you want to call it that, manufactures emptiness because there's nobody else in the photo, and this is so much a part of the kind of sometimes they're Instagram reels, or sometimes they're photos of people, what it looks like when people are at tourist destinations, actually taking the [00:20:00] photo in front of the Eiffel Tower, or the Great Wall, or the Leaning Tower of Pisa, or whatever, and there's actually hundreds.

And thousands of people taking the same photo or trying to, and everyone wants to have that photo without anyone else in it. And so, just a little preamble to the question again, in Landscapes for Likes, you write that

"this manufacturing of emptiness privileges tourists as the sole consumers of a landscape, and with its residents hidden from view, a landscape is voided of its human and temporal context. Thus abstracted, place is relevant as little but a visual commodity."

And then just another quote that I think brings a little something else to the picture is that

"the promontory witness motif scrubs the landscape of the tourist destination of any sign of human habitation, but that of the tourist, singularly pictured in a position of mastery that confers [00:21:00] possession over the destination."

And so there seems to be a kind of shared understanding in critical tourism studies that modern and especially social media based travel photography emphasizes empty spaces, of course, minus the Instagram user, the person photographing question. And so I'm curious, why is identifying the emptying of the landscape so important for our understanding?

What does it do to us as photo viewers?

Sean: Yeah, that's an excellent question and I think I'm very, I'm very interested in this composition, which the lone tourist and the landscape, which, mean, other people before me have pointed to, and at least John Urry.

And I think there are two things happening here. For one, it's the kind of picture that's due to the mediation of what we can think of as a travel habitus, due to the way that [00:22:00] people have learned about how to do tourism and to represent themselves doing tourism and the most sophisticated way or in the way that is the most likely to gain them social distinction. They take these images because they've seen these images before and they're attractive images as well. Maybe they're attractive because we have, through seeing so many pictures like them, we've been taught or sort of subconsciously imbibed the aesthetics as being something that we value and are attracted to.

One degree of what's of what's taking place. And to another extent, when it comes to this notion of possessing something of being the only person that that goes there, this kind of image of the tourist being the only person in a landscape or in front of some sort of cultural monument is , a way of [00:23:00] claiming a symbolic status, which links back to this ideology of getting off the beaten track. So, I imagine if you're experience backpacking and my own there's a real interest in getting off the beaten path, of going to places that aren't touristy, of being a traveler and not a tourist. And part of the way that the success in getting off the beaten track is signified is being the only person in a photograph.

You know, we as backpackers or tourists don't want to be associated with other tourists. And there's very little better way to represent not being another tourist than being the only person in a particular image.

Chris: Yeah, it [00:24:00] makes you wonder. And putting together the research for this episode, I came to this, this kind of possibility, question, consternation, And it arose in this way. And so the, the next question, which kind of relates to the last one is, do you think there might be, or is a connection here between the emptying of the photo of humans or locals and the emptying of places of humans and locals, and that is in the context of the gentrification of local people and culture in tourist destinations.

Sean: Yeah, yeah, absolutely. It's a very good point. I think especially because gentrification is aesthetically produced through a kind of emptiness or a kind of minimalism. And this gentrified neighborhood is not something that is crowded. It is not some place that there are a lot of wayward signs, [00:25:00] wayward, quote unquote.

It is a space which is typically designed according to what might be understood as a globalized regime of clean lines and interesting fonts and a lot of white space. So thinking about the way that that works and everything from upmarket coffee shops to designing neighborhoods that are meant to attract capital on upper middle class consumers and residents.

I think that does link quite persuasively with this desire to be the only person within this landscape. I mean, what ultimately is taking place in both processes is that, no matter where somebody is going and taking a promontory witness picture, there are people who live there. There's people who've always lived there and been a part, in many ways, of the land that is being made into a landscape.

And by not including [00:26:00] them, within these pictures or in processes of gentrification, actually through state-sanctioned programs or other forms of state-sanctioned investment, local residents are being pushed out to make way for different people, the tourist in this case. There is a process of erasure and, and often what can be conceived as really a very colonial process of taking over, taking over a space and privileging the owners of capital, who in this case, typically are tourists.

And of course, it's a little bit different when you're taking a picture versus when you're taking a picture in a place that is not considered part of the Global North. But tourists typically have a lot more privilege and financial resources than local residents.

And when they're not in these images, but the places in which they are are included, then at least when we're seeing pictures of it, how [00:27:00] do we imagine who, who controls the space? How do we imagine who has a right to this space? It would be the person in the photograph, the tourist, rather than the people who actually live, work, and, and shape these landscapes.

Okay.

Chris: Since Instagram tends to be the go to medium for these images and for images in general, as far as social media is concerned, do you think that Instagram then is a tool and driver of gentrification? Could we say that with a sense of coherence?

Sean: I think it's as much a tool as, as many other tools and it is very easily leveraged to that end by actors who are seeking to mobilize processes of gentrification. And then I think this is pretty well documented for instance, in Yoo Jung oh's article Instagaze, Aesthetic Representation and Contested Transformation of Woljeong, South Korea.

Well, she was [00:28:00] writing about Jeju Island in South Korea, and how once tourists started to take particular forms of images often of being one person in a beach, then different interests were able to move in and realize the value of this image and find ways to capitalize on all of the tourists that wanted to come and take that same image. So what that led to was the beach front where, this is largely a fishing community and other sort of small scale, more artisanal economies, was remade into cafes and restaurants and guest houses in a process that.

I think it can be widely recognized in tourism development around the world. But what the author, Yu Jung Oh, is saying, is showing there, is that this was largely motivated by the ability to take this image, that [00:29:00] a tourist could go and purchase a coffee or something, and they would be able to take that image for their Instagram.

So there's a really clear linkage there and I think that linkage can be made in many other places as well. But I think in that sense, Instagram and social media is, is can be leveraged for gentrification as, as many other tools can be and are being.

Chris: Thank you, Sean. And so, know, for the rest of our time together, I'd like to kind of lean on you a little bit for your personal opinion. I know that sometimes working in and living in academic worlds that's kind of something to be left the doorstep before you walk in. But you know, you mentioned this notion of networked media and pre networked media and kind of social media falling into this wider term of networked media and since these mediums have only come to exist, in terms of Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, [00:30:00] we're talking 15 years at the most, and then the extension or prototypes of those existing in the previous 10. So about 25 years, maybe.

And I'm curious in this regard you know, I imagine that you're about my age, maybe a little bit younger so I'm curious if you have a lived memory of how things were before social media and perhaps even before the internet, what do you think we might be losing by virtue of not being able to remember the world without social media

Sean: yeah, great question. Definitely. Yeah. Yeah, very good question. Very, of course, fraught. So I guess for context, I was born in 1988. And. So I, got a cell phone at 16, and again, I got a smartphone and Instagram and WhatsApp. So I'm really in two minds about this. And in the first sense, I think it's important to be aware of [00:31:00] how with any new technology there's a great deal of anxiety and resistance and what might be called panic. And this isn't just social media or it's not just television, but we can go all the way back to radio, to novels.

People were worried about that, to the written word back in the ancient Greek era. People were concerned that when we start writing things down, this is going to make it very difficult to remember things, and we're going to be less successful orators and our reasoning will be diluted because we start writing things down.

So there's always this kind of fear of new technology, and part of me wants to recognize that this is just another one of those periods in which some sort of transformative technology comes along and many of [00:32:00] the generation who can remember what it was like beforehand is going to feel varying degrees of nostalgia for that period.

That said, it's also difficult to not, at the same time, say that something really significant has, has, has happened, to not feel, I mean, honestly, I do certainly feel nostalgia for periods before social media. Some of the things which I think have been changed is the interest in finding ways to represent oneself, traveling. And this isn't to say that whenever one goes somewhere, one is always sort of seeing it as if from the viewfinder or, well, it wouldn't really be a viewfinder of a camera so much as, you know, one's phone screen.

But that leads to. In being very interested in taking images that would be successful within the attention economies of a platform like Instagram, it can be difficult to [00:33:00] not see the world as if from the perspective of what would make a good picture for Instagram. There's a lot of different people who've come up with critiques of this process.

I mean, if you think about it in terms of spectacle, you know, like Guy DuBord's idea that we're no longer, and he was writing in the 60s, you know, that we are seeing relationships, not between people, but between people and images. And so some sort of fundamental human connection is being lost because all we're doing is just relating to images and using images to relate to other people.

I'm not so sure about universalizing that idea, but the ubiquity of social media and the Challenges to not somehow be on one of these platforms, in some even practical way does mean, I think, that there are significant influences in tourism as much as anything.

Chris: Yeah, my my phone died the other day, abruptly. [00:34:00] And you know, I still have this computer that thankfully allows me to have this interview with you. And I can still access Facebook and Twitter, but for whatever reason, I can't access Instagram. And you know, it's been a few days and I'm really loving it.

And then this morning I realized that I had planned to upload a post for the podcast. And then I was just like, okay, well, my best recourse of action is to just stay calm and wait, right? Yeah, and it's a big question, and I think it's something that, I wonder if young people, say people born, you know, 2000 or after would be able to answer with, with any, without having lived in a time without social media, for example.

And so this kind of like brings us a little bit towards the towards theme of media ecology, which, you know, we talked about just very briefly before we started our interview here and I had taken Andrew McLuhan's Understanding Media [00:35:00] Intensive last year.

He was also on the pod in the, in season three and just generally speaking for our listeners media ecology, within media ecology, the focus is on the medium and not just the message. It's a way of taking to task the context of our technology and not just the content.

And so this manufacturing of emptiness of people and places as brands and I'm curious, isn't this to a large extent, also contingent on our tools, on the limits and architecture of the camera, for example? You know, do we stop with Instagram or do we look at all social media and later all tools? Because these media exist within each other, right?

Instagram is a medium within the internet, I suppose, and then the internet is a medium within the phone. Maybe you could make that argument. It's not to say, if we didn't have these things, if we didn't have Instagram, if we didn't have [00:36:00] social media, would the promontory witness just disappear? I don't think it's as easy as that. But Would it be as intensely magnified in our time?

Sean: So yes, I think the question of magnification is really what sits at the heart of social media because if we're looking at the medium of Instagram, then we have to think about photography and which was invented in the 1840s.

And then if we think about photography, we have to think about painting the way that landscape has been represented in many different cultures, both in painting in the Western, Chinese and many other traditions, but then also in poetry and literature. So with all of these things, there's a precedent.

And I think if you look at something like the Promontory Witness, this composition and this the visual formation of having one person immersed within a landscape or standing at some edge of a cliff, that's been around for [00:37:00] 200 years at least. You can see some in the later 1700s that look like this, but then the desire to be the only person in a particular place to have gotten off of the beaten track and be the distinguished traveler, that's also been around for, for a very long time. So that's why I think I'm hesitant to sort of pin the blame on Instagram.

And I think my thinking around this has taken a bit of it, not exactly a turn, but it's changed a bit. So I think there's a real tendency to look at platforms like Instagram as only being spaces in which processes of gentrification can gain momentum, or only be spaces where one is almost disciplined into being a neoliberal subject who, is working sort of subconsciously thinking about how to brand oneself all the time, specifically in places of tourism, you know, that it's a way that people [00:38:00] only think about the pictures. They only want to go take a picture in these places. They don't actually want to have any experiences in this place or relationships with the people there.

And I think that really exists. That is absolutely one dimension of what takes place with social media platforms. But as many people I've spoken to say, social media is a double edged sword. And where that's really been driven home to me has been where I've been conducting research for the past almost two years now. Sometimes they're in person, other times digitally, in Oman, a country in the Arabian peninsula where I was interested initially because it was becoming more popular as an international tourism destination.

So, I went there after the pandemic expecting to meet all these people who were experiencing the problematics of international tourism as we know well, I think from your podcast among other, among other spaces.

And there's some of that, absolutely. But what I also found was that, in the past few [00:39:00] years, people who are living in Oman, and this is both Omanis, people who have citizenship and then also residents, so there's about 40 percent of the country is made up of people who don't have citizenship in Oman, like many other Gulf countries.

And in the past few years, I mean, we're talking five years, maximum ten years, there's been this surge of interest in nature, or we can say is the non human or even the more than human environment and what's can be understood as domestic nature tourism, I think, like many places around the world, domestic nature tourism in Oman became was very popularized during the pandemic when people could not travel abroad.

But what this meant is that people saw these images on Instagram and Instagram is really most popular app in Oman, next to WhatsApp, and that introduced them to parts of the country that they'd never [00:40:00] interacted with before.

And Oman is this incredibly various and fascinating environment where there's mountains that are, you know, over 3, 000 meters higher, what is that 10, 000 feet you know, all of this coastline and with coral reefs and these waddies or slot canyons. And people began to engage with the environments in a very different way to go on hiking trips, to go on canyoning trips and social media was this massive part of that.

You know, this is where people learned about this possibility, this is where people met people to introduce them, to take them safely into these spaces. They'd never been on a hike before. You know, Instagram is where they're going to meet somebody to go out into nature with.

And it's not to say that this doesn't have problems associated with it, and everything I suppose related with tourism does, but I think it also represents a case where Instagram, in this sense, was a way that people are actively connecting to nature, and in a place [00:41:00] where, you know, Instagram existed and was widely used before nature tourism was a thing.

And I think this kind of flips the narrative a bit where in Western Europe, where I'm sitting right now, for instance, there's been this long time practice of nature tourism, you know, going back to, again, the 1900s. You know, people started climbing Alps in the 1850s and so forth. And then Instagram comes along and everybody's saying, oh, people just want to climb the mountain to take a picture.

you know, they don't actually care about nature. Well, in Oman, people weren't really, not that many people were climbing mountains, before the ability to take a picture existed. So, there's a bit of a different trajectory in which people began to relate to a particular space and to the kinds of experiences that one can have engaging in nature tourism.

So in that sense to go back to your to your question about what do we essentially do with this platform? [00:42:00] And how do we address the problematics? I don't think that I mean, I think that Instagram will not be the most popular platform forever, certainly, but social media, or this kind of connected media, barring some kind of unforeseen complication.

I mean, looking at you, AI.

But this sort of communication is here to stay probably. So, can we find ways in which this space is can be generative of community could be generative of care and ethical forms of travel? What might that look like? And what kind of imagery might be associated with it?

Chris: I'm curious in that regard, Oman to me is someone who's never been and probably, you know extremely ignorant to any of the nation's culture or history. I imagine modernity to be something of a recent arrival in that place, relatively speaking, correct me if I'm wrong, of course. And I guess what I'm curious about in the context of your research and most [00:43:00] recent research is if you've seen the conflicts that might arise in terms of traditional hospitality? What it means to be in a place, as opposed to a landscape, what it means to be a host, as opposed to, I guess a landlord, in the Airbnb sense of the word and perhaps also what it means to be a traveler as opposed to a tourist within the context of these new economic dynamics in Oman and if Instagram has anything to do with that?

Sean: No, that's, that's a wonderful question. It's one I really appreciate as I continue to work there and spend time with people who've been incredibly generous showing me around and introducing me to what their life is like as people who participate in tourism. I mean, the first thing I would say is the Oman, the Arabian peninsula and really Arabic speaking cultures generally is hospitality is one of the most fundamentally [00:44:00] important things in social relationships. In what it means to be a part of this culture, one is hospitable to guests, to friends, to family members. It's almost difficult to understate how integral this is. I mean, it is, in many cultures, hospitality is big, but it's very big in this space.

And so I think it's a particularly well suited question to, you know, how is tourism and how is social media impacting this code of conduct and, you know this really wonderful practice that I think, you know, the rest of the world can stand to learn a lot from.

So, to your question about sort of where my mind sits in this span of development. Oil was discovered in the 1960s and kind of transformative effect as it has everywhere. And in this time, there was a great degree of urbanization. People could get services rather than relying on culture, trading, which comes from a pre oil economy.[00:45:00]

Now, you see, I think, a couple things. For one thing, cultures of hospitality, I think, were already being disturbed by the way that neoliberal capitalism tends to work, not just in Oman, but anywhere around the world. It encourages people to find ways to profit themselves and to think as individual agents rather than as being part of a community, having responsibilities to the humans, but also nonhumans to the land as well as to one's family.

So that process is already in it's already taking place before tourism began to take root. And I think there are some spaces in which tourism is developing in such a way that it's very profit oriented. And where people are incentivized to privilege [00:46:00] their own gains over those of others.

However, there are other ways I think in which people who, say we're living in the city, are meeting people who live in fairly remote areas, under the auspices of tourism. Because they're engaging in tourism, they're meeting people who are living in these spaces and often chatting with them or sharing a meal or sharing coffee or something like this.

Sometimes these people who are living in places that are becoming tourism destinations are part of the industry and sometimes people are not, but as it stands now, it seems as very much a preservation of hospitality within this, this particular context. As with anything, I think the question of tourism is to what extent this will become commodified or not, like how do we make money off of this culture of hospitality?

How do we turn it into a tourist product? You know, we can sell Oman as being it's hospitable, come meet the locals. But in the way that people continue [00:47:00] to practice it, both people who are living in Oman and being domestic tourists and also people who are seeing tourists come to where they live in ways that they haven't before. To me, it still seems like it's very robustly in place.

Chris: Good to hear. And I very much look forward to the publication of your research. Hopefully it'll see the light of day soon, perhaps.

Sean: I hope so. Yeah. Things are in process for sure.

Chris: Okay. Well, I'd like to thank you, Sean, on behalf of our listeners for joining us today. And you know, this leads me of course, to the question of how might they be able to get in touch with you or follow your work. And if that includes an Instagram handle.

Sean: Yeah, that's, that's fine. So I I recently started another Instagram account. I had my own account and stopped posting about 2019.

And then I got interested in it again. I opened a new account, which is sort of more research facing. So yeah, if people wanna check that [00:48:00] out, it's @SPSMITHS, so S-P-S-M-I-T-H-S or email spSmith@tilburguniversity.edu. So always pleased to hear ideas and of course things that I've missed because of course I have so much to learn in this space.

So I would really look forward to feedback and ideas. Hmm.

Chris: Well, I'll make sure all of that's on the End of Tourism website and the podcast page when the interview launches and as well as the other authors, researchers and works that you mentioned earlier on. So once again, it's been amazing, Sean, thank you so much for being able to really flesh these complex ideas out for us and we'll see what happens, right?

Sean: Absolutely. Thanks very much for the invitation. And as always, I'll look forward to continue listening. This is such an excellent project.

Chris: Thank you, Sean.

This episode and others like it are created and made possible by the generosity of Substack subcribers like yourself. Similarly, I have subsidized the work of the pod with my own time and money. This is a labour of love and lineage that requires the support of others. Please consider offering a gift in return, whether that include upgrading to paid subscription, making a one-time donation, sharing the podcast among your people or being willing to reach out and assist in production (as others have).

Thank you. Bless. Peace.

Subscribe now

Give a gift subscription

S5 #6 | Relearning Home & Hospitality w/ Manish Jain (Ecoversities)

Chris Christou — Fri, 07 Jun 2024 11:33:05 GMT

On this episode, my guest is Manish Jain, a man deeply committed to regenerating our diverse local knowledge systems, cultural imaginations and inter-cultural dialogue. Inspired by MK Gandhi, Rabindranath Tagore, Ivan Illich, his illiterate village grandmother, his unschooled daughter, indigenous communities and Jain spiritual philosophy, he is one of the leading planetary voices for deschooling our lives and reimagining education.

He has served for the past 25 years as Chief Beaver (ecosystems builder) of Shikshantar: The Peoples’ Institute for Rethinking Education and Development based in Udaipur, India and is co-founder of some of the most innovative educational experiments in the world - the Swaraj University, the Jail University, Complexity University, Tribal Farmversity, the Creativity Adda, the Learning Societies Unconference, the Walkouts-Walk-on network, Udaipur as a Learning City, the Families Learning Together network, Berkana Exchange. He co-launched the global Ecoversities Alliance with 500+ members in 50 countries.

Subscribe now

Show Notes:

Kidnapped by the American Dream

Grandma’s University

Reclaiming our Cultural Imagination

Cultural Imagination for the Culturally Homeless

The Radical and Exponential Power of Trust

Unlearning Cultural Appropriation in the Oral Tradition

Jugard, or “playful improvisation”

Being Reclaimed by Ancestors

Swaraj University - Money, Love, and Death

Alivelihoods and Deadlihoods

Traditions of Hospitality in Rajasthan

Ecoversities

Homework:

Swaraj University Website

Ecoversities Website

Jugaad (Wikipedia)

Transcript:

[00:00:00] Welcome, Manish, to the End of Tourism podcast. Thanks for joining me today.

Thank you, Chris. Great to be here. Great to be with you.

Speaking of here, I was wondering if you could share with our listeners where you find yourself today and maybe what the world looks like for you where you are.

Yes, I live in a very magical place called Udaipur.

It's in Rajasthan, India. I have been here for the last 25 years. Before that I was moving cities every year. I was living in the U. S. and Europe. And my village is about two hours from where I live, from the city. And I have lots of relatives here, lots of ancestors around. And this happens to be one of the major tourist destinations of India.

So it's an interesting combination of very [00:01:00] cosmopolitan kind of global jet set coming in, but also lots of traditional culture, local knowledge, still alive. We were lucky to be called backwards and underdeveloped. And so many things have remained but again under, under continuous threat by kind of urbanization and global economy.

But yeah, it's a very beautiful place, lots of palaces, lakes all kinds of animals on the street. On a good day you'll see an elephant walking down the street or a camel just in our neighborhoods and yeah, I love it here. So it's, I mean, it's found a place in my heart for sure.

Hmm. What a gift. What a gift to, to live in a place that you love and, you know, it seems to be that question at the heart of the themes of the podcast and in that regard, I wanted to begin by asking you a little bit about your journey, Manish. So[00:02:00] from what I've read, from what I've heard, a lot of your work centers around de schooling and unlearning, specifically with Swaraj University and other educational endeavors, Ecoversities being one of them.

And I'd like to return to those themes and projects in a little bit and start by asking you, among other things, about your earlier accolades as a Harvard graduate and someone with a degree from Brown University. One of your bios says that you worked for, among others the American multinational investment bank, Morgan Stanley, as well as UNESCO, UNICEF, World Bank, and USAID in South Asia, Africa, and the former Soviet Union.

And so I'm wondering if you'd be willing to share what led to your initial involvement in these rather prominent institutions, and then subsequently, what led to leaving them behind thereafter?

Yeah, thank you. Yeah, hearing that [00:03:00] always gives me the shivers a little bit. It's like such a long time ago now. But so I kind of actually grew up with a deep sense of wanting to serve, serve the world. And when I was growing up I actually, I tell people I was kidnapped when I was three years old, born in India, but then taken to the U. S. Kidnapped by the American dream, which I over time realized was a nightmare for most of the planet.

So this deep sense of service has always been, been with me, maybe from my mother, from my father, from my grandparents, many, many sources from, inspired by also Gandhi and, and Tagore and many other Indian freedom fighters.

But I kind of grew up with this narrative, if you want to serve, you should go to the big places, the places of big power, those institutions, that's where you can influence, that's where you can make the most impact. And so that kind of was a trajectory that I, I kind of [00:04:00] got put on I kind of was very good.

I never liked being in these institutions, but I was very good at faking it I faked it through school all the way to Harvard and, and so I was pretty good at faking it and eventually it caught up with me and I started feeling like I was becoming a fake. So, but going to those places I thought there were, you know, those were the centers of power and that when I got there, I started feeling that these places, each of these places, one by one, I started realizing that they were actually quite powerless in many ways, surrounded by a sense of scarcity and fear and very limited imagination.

And so one by one, I became disillusioned with each of each of those places. I was expecting that, you know, these would be the places which could help serve humanity, but I realized that they were built on, you know, this continuous model of extraction and colonization and exploitation of [00:05:00] life.

And so even with education, I felt like, okay education will be the solution and I started realizing that education was a huge part of the problem. And so that's what led me started me on the de schooling path to try to see how we can find other ways besides relying on these institutions and the logic of capitalism and commodification to solve our problems. You know, over time I started really developing a severe mistrust of experts.

I was one of them, like, although I'm fake and so are the rest of these guys. So by the time I was 28, I hit the wall. And I was like I don't have anywhere else to go, I've been to all these big places, and I don't really see, see any hope from them. I don't think they can be repaired either or that they can actually take the kinds of initiatives that are needed to change the game.

So that's what led me back to India then[00:06:00] to be with my illiterate village grandmother. And I thought I'll take care of her. And then I, my wife and I realized that we had inadvertently become part of our grandmother's university and she was our unlearning guru. To both Get beyond I would say a lot of our own fears and anxieties, get beyond a lot of the, let's say Western liberal do gooder frameworks, get beyond our attachment to institutions just to solve things for us and start to understand and remember, I think remembering is a word that I have discussed many times with old common friend of ours, Gustavo Esteva, but start to remember that we have much more richness and wealth and creativity, possibility within us and our, and within our communities. So that's been a little bit of the journey to re remember and reclaim and reimagine things.

I [00:07:00] remember seeing in one of your talks that you said that your work or to you, what you understood your work to be is, is a way of reclaiming our cultural imagination. I'm wondering if you could elaborate a little bit on that.

Yeah, I think basically I think the deepest form of colonization has happened is to our imaginations.

And there is a phrase from the eighties from Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher called TINA. "There Is No Alternative." So, as there was an uprising that started happening around the world questioning the dominant development paradigm, the global economy, it was quickly suppressed, repressed by this phrase, TINA.

This is the best system that we have, and you know, there's, there's nothing beyond it, so you should just try to improve what's there. And so I think what then [00:08:00] people are forced into is to try to fix or let's say work with what is the existing frameworks and definitions that we have been fed about things like progress or development or success or happiness and then we are all in a very deep endless losing race to try to catch up with something.

And we're not even sure what happens when you win. Maybe that's where it hit me. You know, there's a saying, if you, if you beat them at their own game, you lose everything. And so I kind of started realizing that personally, and also when I was looking at the development paradigm more different more closely.

So I think, you know, what else is possible first of beyond the kind of logic of the rational mind, what's possible beyond the anthropocentric perspectives that we have on life, what's possible beyond global corporations and institutions deciding what's best for us, what's [00:09:00] possible beyond markets and technologies as the solutions for all of the planet's woes.

I think that's what we're trying to explore when I talk about cultural imagination. And I, I think that the first step is to open up the definitions again. This is another thing I think many of my elders, Gustavo, and, Ivan Illich and a person here in India who was a friend of Gustavo's, Claude Alvarez, many were urging us that we need to open up the definitions of things.

So that's what usually I think in a lot of the decolonial movements, what didn't happen that we accepted their definitions of development of the good life, all of those things. And then we started pursuing that, but actually it's a very exciting time that we can actually crack that open. And see, okay, what is it?

Little Bhutan, a country of 700, 000. People asking, you know, what is happiness? And saying that[00:10:00] you know, the West, you guys have all the money, you guys have all the technology, you have all the armies, but are your people happy? So I think, you know, this is happening in obviously in Latin America, "buen vivir," in India, Swaraj, so many movements, which I think are challenging the given definitions and creating a space for us to dream differently, to tap into a different worldview which recognizes a sense of the sacred and recognizes that we are not just, you know, cogs in the machine in terms of our purpose on this earth.

So I think those are, that's a little bit of what I mean by reclaiming the cultural imagination.

Hmm. And you mentioned Swaraj and I'm really excited to dive into that and see where this notion of reclaiming cultural imagination fits there in a place and not just in philosophies.

But I wanted to ask you this kind of this little follow up question in regards to the cultural imagination. Because we've [00:11:00] had the great honor to befriend and learn from people like Gustavo. But I think of my family and friends and compañeros, colleagues in Toronto, major North American metropolis.

And I wonder how reclaiming the cultural imagination looks like or could be for people who would consider themselves either cultural orphans or culturally homeless. You know I mean, you and I have distinct ties, it seems, and a lived memory to the places our people moved or migrated from or still live in.

And so there's a bridge of sorts that already exists that on some level can still be crossed. What about the people who have no lived memory of where their people come from or who would admit, or at least can offer up the idea that they have no culture?

Yeah, so, oh, that's a great question. So, [00:12:00] I think maybe the first thing I would kind of offer in that situation is that one is a question of how to reconnect to the land and the territory you live in the place, the water, the rivers, the mountains, the forests. There's a tremendous amount of memory that, that lives in the place which can help us recover parts of ourselves that have been lost. The other is, I think, in terms of reconnecting to our bodies again, there's a tremendous amount of wisdom. We can recover again from our own bodies, from our breath also reconnecting to our breath in a very profound way and help us recover things.

And also when I talk about culture, I think the essence of culture without being an essentialist, is is what I call gift culture. Mm-Hmm. So this culture of, of connection, of care, of kindness, of trust, of hospitality, of [00:13:00] forgiveness. There's so many traditions like that, wherever we are, and we can also create new traditions around these things.

And so, a lot of times we confuse culture for the food or for the clothes or for the music of a place. But I think the deeper level of all culture is a gift culture, which is a reminder of the interconnectedness of life, the thread that is woven through all of us, connects us to something very sacred and even divine in some sense.

So, I think that reconnecting to the spirit of kindness and care is a huge step. We've been doing a lot of experiments over the years around gift culture and reconnecting to a field of trust again. I call it the radical and exponential power of trust.

Much of our work and I would almost say in the miracles that I see every day in our work are because of this field of trust that we have been able to reconnect to and this is what my [00:14:00] grandmother, I think, was helping me to reconnect to in terms of culture is because I remember growing up in the U. S. this continuous thing of don't trust anyone, don't trust your neighbors, don't trust anyone, somebody, anybody is being kind to you because they may have an angle. They may steal from you or cheat from you or whatever, and I think it took me a lot of healing to come out of that and that has been a phenomenal journey in terms of opening up possibilities for how I connect, and one other thing I would say is that.

A lot of, I know this has been a major unlearning area because I used to be very critical of all of this cultural appropriation that we see in the West, people picking up things in here, here and there. But as I've been in India and I've become more connected to the oral traditions, very different kind of ethics and philosophy and ways of, of living and doing things that lives in an oral tradition.

Like [00:15:00] I grew up with this strong fear of, you know, plagiarism. You know, that was the one thing Harvard and Brown hammer you is about plagiarizing. Cite every word. Chris said this, or Gustavo said this, right? And I found in the oral tradition, there's a different kind of trickster level playfulness that you can take anything, play with anything.

You don't have to cite, you can modify, you can change, you can adapt. And I think I've been trying to bring that more into these conversations around cultural appropriation, because I think people get so afraid nowadays of being bashed for exploring a different culture for taking things.

Obviously, there is a level of depth and engagement and commitment, dedication to understanding something that I would invite in that. But being able to pick up things, I think has been part of our culture. People take things and spread them and appropriate them in ways that keep them alive and moving so it's something I've been exploring a [00:16:00] lot is that it seems very much more controlling and part of the old paradigm to say that we need to protect and there are certain cultural gatekeepers and certain kinds of people who who will tell you you're right or wrong in the culture.

So I also would want to open up that conversation, exploration with people.

Thank you. You know what I mean? You know what I mean with that? Yeah. Yeah, definitely. It definitely points towards a notion of cultures being static and that there being a degree of authenticity, a kind of original foundation or culture for a people which seems to be a relic of 19th century anthropology and things like that.

And, and a restriction that we are just these bodies in this present time. You know, in India, obviously we talk about reincarnation and so there, there may be other, other cultures within us and that we've lived that [00:17:00] want to express themselves and want to be opened in this life as well, which maybe our body and our place doesn't necessarily give us that opportunity, but the possibility exists, or the the desire even if is there so. I would want to invite us to all of that as well.

Mm hmm, and you've been speaking a lot about how your time in India has really been an opportunity for you to unlearn, maybe disassociate a little bit from the taught worldview that you had in the United States.

And this next question comes from a friend of ours dear friend Erin, and She wanted to ask about your move to India or move back depending on how you choose to understand it and how that experience has been for you as someone who grew up on the other side of the world and what do you think it means in the context of [00:18:00] your migration to be claimed or reclaimed by a place.

Beautiful. Yeah. I think it's been quite a powerful and even I would say magical journey because as you said, the place and the people reclaim me. Part of it is that, you know, my relatives are here, my ancestors are here. And so at times when I felt, you know, a little bit out of place they reminded me that I belong here and I'm welcome here.

And I think what I've made a very strong effort to do is to reground myself in different ways and maybe those ways have been made the transition more smooth or beautiful in one way. So one is like, you know, a lot of the ideas, for example, or work that I'm doing I've tried to find cultural reference points and stories that makes sense because initially when I came, a lot of the things I was talking about, [00:19:00] people were like, oh, that's another Western idea. That's something you're just bringing. It's not Indian, blah, blah, whatever. So I started to look for stories in the past.

So when I talk about my university, Swaraj University, I tell people it's 5, 000 years old. Our first chancellor was from the Mahabharata, Ekalavya, the story of Ekalavya, the first documented, self-designed learner and so that all of a sudden something clicks differently for people of how they hear it, how they connect it. When I talk about, for example, when we used to talk a lot, Erin, since you brought her up, we explored a lot of zero waste and upcycling together.

There's a word in Hindi, jugard, which means playful improvisation. So, using our own words to describe it rather than trying to take everything from English and translate it. But also I'd say, you know, like people would say, again, zero waste. This is a Western sustainability thing. I said, no no, wait a second.

Our grandmothers are all zero waste masters. So, you [00:20:00] know, let us understand that all of these ideas are actually connected to many things that we have in our own culture. So that's made it a very beautiful thing because it's not only being welcoming, it's actually unleashing a lot of energy that had been pent up with people like fear and you know, self -limiting, self-belief, self -suppression in a sense.

So all of a sudden hearing that, Oh, this is actually has roots in who we are, has opened up a lot for ways we engage in people to accept me and some of the ideas and experiments we've been sharing. So that's been good. And I think the other thing is really a kind of regrounding. So when I moved back, I was good at PowerPoint and Excel.

My worldview was through Microsoft products, right? So what I learned again was to reconnect to farming and our food systems. And I think Aerin and Yeyo's journey is also, we've been together on this for many years, but [00:21:00] also to local language again, and you know, making our own clothes, building our own buildings, you know our own healing techniques and plants here.

So, just reconnecting to a lot of those things have helped the place to welcome me in different ways and also me to be able to build different relationships with a lot of diverse people here as well. And I think the third thing is really that just to add was like this, one of the deschooling ideas was to core is to shed these labels of failures of looking, you know, at only educated people as intelligent.

So there's so much wisdom and creativity and beauty and love that is with people who don't have degrees. And so being able to see that because I was able to let go of these labels and these frameworks has really helped me again, beautifully connecting with many people and many energies here.

Wonderful. And [00:22:00] do you think that those, those points that you just mentioned, that they were causes or consequences of you and your people there opening Swaraj University? Or did it evolve into that? It happened, you know, like I said, we have more than a thousand faculty in Swaraj University, and they are grandmothers and farmers and artisans and mountains and lakes and, and trees, the human, the more than human.

The one other thing that's really been very powerful is, you know, the place I live in, I would say about 80 percent of the people living here talk to their ancestors. Like without a shaman, they can, you know, like my cousins or my aunt can channel ancestors and we would have all night prayer rituals to talk, connect with them, invite them.

And it's like people, and for me with my western trained scientific mind, I [00:23:00] couldn't understand this initially and then it started to open up once I kind of allowed myself to breathe with it opened up a whole different set of possibilities also in engagement to the place where the ancestors were welcoming me. As well to this place. So, that has been beautiful.

And another thing that happened was I met, again, a lot of traditional healers. So 25 years ago when I was meeting them was a huge amount of skepticism. My mother's a doctor in the U. S. and she doesn't trust anything Ayurvedic or folk medicines or anything.

So when I met them, I was skeptical, but as I spent time with them, and started seeing that they're, they actually have some very deep power. And when I asked them, you know, how did you learn all of this stuff? Because you think of this plant with this, you know, the bark of this and the, you have to boil that with the roots of this and mix it with this.

I'm like, so many combinations and permutations, right? And I'm like, they didn't have supercomputers. [00:24:00] So I asked them, how did you guys learn this? And they said, what do you think? And I very proudly used to say trial and error, you know, that must be the scientific method. And they would laugh like crazy.

And I'm like, what, what was it like that? That's so primitive trial and error. It's so primitive. I'm like, what? And they would, I said, how did they do it? They said, Oh, we could, our ancestors could talk to the plants. And so once I kind of started to allow that worldview to permeate me, it started to create a different sense of connection to the place, I think.

And so it's been a very beautiful journey to in a sense, one can say rewild myself here.

And are those, are those themes incorporated into swarajs, and I don't want to say curriculum, because we all know that's a four letter word for a lot of people, but but in terms of de schooling, in terms of unlearning, in terms of, these kinds of old time [00:25:00] learnings, what does a student maybe encounter at Swaraj?

Yeah. So there's no curriculum per se, but we have, you know, a few different elements to it. It's all derived from living together, right? So, one is obviously, we call it learning from the gift of conflict. So as you're living together, there's conflicts that start to emerge all the time.

So those conflicts are very beautiful entry points into kind of reflecting, if you, once you move beyond the blame narrative to reflect on yourself, what's triggering you, why do you feel disturbed about it? So very, very powerful opportunities to reflect on oneself. We have also what we call a lot of unlearning challenges.

So those are optional, but we've created different challenges because we felt there's a lot of conditioning that people come into. Swaraj with and they're around many different areas, but I would say three of the common ones are around most [00:26:00] common around money unlearning our free fear, anxiety scarcity that's related to the money system.

Even our self worth gets tied so much to the money system. So, we have a lot of different experiments around that. The second is around love. Both starting with self love, but then how we understand love, how we relate, notions of jealousy, inferiority, all kinds of things which are tied to love.

And the third is then death. Death. And so are so these are places that we explore a bit. We have different experiments where people can, you know, for example, and imagine your death would be an invitation that we would invite people into a process. So there's a lot of unlearning experiments. And then the third is that people actually then have a lot of space to design their own personal programs of what they want to explore.

And in that process, because you're living in a community, lots of informal learning is happening. Peer to peer, your friend is doing [00:27:00] something. Maybe you start, like, I'm not interested, but after a month of seeing your friend, or a few months, you start, it's just something starts, you know, entering into your system and you realize, Oh, maybe I do like this or this is interesting.

And your friend leaves it. I've seen cases, a friend leaves it and the other person picks it up and you know, takes it forward also. So, all of this kind of cross pollination is happening all the time, which is very beautiful. So those are some of the things that happen in Swaraj.

And I think where we would invite this is we are becoming more, I think we've become more and more bold over the years, like with this idea of ritual and the sacred. So, in India, there was a lot of, you know first from the left, a lot of bashing of ritual and sacred as these were Brahmanical tools to suppress and these are superstitious. And these tools are, you know, the Marxist idea that these are to [00:28:00] control the masses.

And then also, it was bashed because these are ways to cement a kind of fascist Hindu paradigm which is against minorities and things. So, there was a lot of, lot of stories running in our heads around ritual. And then our own personal experiences that oftentimes meaningless, they become fractured, they become rigid and so what we've tried to do is really reclaim the space of ritual in Swaraj.

And part of that is with our ancestors or with the more than human. And so inviting people to look at ritual in a very different way has been very interesting. And sometimes I'm involved in rituals and I'm like, what are you doing? The inner voice says, dude, what are you doing?

You know, like, who are you at this? And, you know, so all of that old stuff that we kind of grew up with in terms of the scientific analytical mind, which sees everything that it can't understand as [00:29:00] superstition sometimes reappears in certain ways, but I think it's been part of the journey to really create a space at least to engage with this, and so in Swaraj very much it's, it's there as well, and, and maybe the, the way we explain it is there's a need to go beyond the kind of the rational, there's a, there's limits to the rational, logical fragmented mind of how it can see or what it can make sense of.

We often even talk about, you know, the way we're trained to think about the crisis is part of the crisis. So, you know, so this space of entering into kind of a liminal energy, a different frequency together is maybe very powerful. And those can be through many different ways, right? Through music, through dance, through food, through fasting.

In India, it's really through silence, you know, so it doesn't always have to be plant medicines, which you find more in Latin America and Africa, but in India, meditation and silence and fasting were and [00:30:00] breathing were really different ways that have been experimented over the centuries for people to enter into a different kind of consciousness together.

Well, it sounds like an incredible place and an incredible project. I hope if the winds allow me to travel again in a way that maybe they once did that I'd be able to experience that myself.

Yes, we have a long, we Udaipur and Oaxaca. So the chances for those winds appearing are pretty good.

Amen. Amen. And speaking of Oaxaca our mutual friend, Yeyo had wanted me to ask you about this formulation of yours and all he wrote was livelihoods as opposed to deadlihoods.

Oh yes, a alivelihoods, alivelihoods. We made a distinction because a lot of people are wondering what can I do today [00:31:00] in the world. And so the first thing is to help them see that most of what the university, the conventional university is preparing us for are what I call deadlihoods. The work, whether you're in law or in finance or in psychology or I.T., somehow or other, they're tied to a deadlihoods economy that is extractive, military, violent. So, how can we start to understand how we ourselves are implicated in that kind of economy. And so that's one part of it. But then to also think about, you know, the work that's needed today in the world is what I call alivelihoods. And that starts with, you know, what makes my spirit come alive?

Because we've we've heard this, "lots of work is soul sucking." So, what is the work that actually nourishes our soul? And gives us meaning and purpose, you know? Lets us reconnect that, you know meaning, purpose, spirituality is not something you [00:32:00] just do on a Sunday or you do in a class, but it's actually tied to the work you're doing in the world and how do we integrate that?

What is the kind of work that is helping my community come alive? That is actually shifting power from global corporations back into communities, which are kind of, what is the work that's building, weaving the bonds of trust? And care, kindness, compassion back into community life. And what is the work that is regenerating our ecosystems?

So what I call our real wealth. So how do we compost the money system? And start to regenerate real wealth with it. Our health, our forests, our soils, our waters, which are all over the world are in massive, massive degradation stages right now. And how do we regenerate the social bonds again?

The trust networks again, that can give us a sense of security, of care, of belonging, of respect, of [00:33:00] dignity. So that's kind of the loose framework we have for that. And I think one other element is that what is the work that will help us shift the worldviews that we have?

So the worldview of the planet is being a dead entity and human beings being the only intelligent beings on this planet and the kind of fear that is driving much of the decision making. How do we start to shift to a different worldview that many indigenous communities had a sense of, much better sense of.

So, what is the work that can help us shift the narratives of who we are? Why are we on this earth together? Why are we, you know, perpetuating these ideas of ownership or of borders of you know, so many things that we have kind of internalized, which are fundamental to the modernist project.

Is there a way to start to unravel these or shift these? So what is the work that allows us that? So I call all of that, all of that a livelihoods, really, and the invitation is to help [00:34:00] people think about how they can be doing that. And I think the other element in that, which is really important is, how do we move beyond this like individual self help kind of narrative we've been fed. You know, like the problem is in you. You have to fix yourself.

Whereas how, how do we shift it more to how do we want to understand the systems and the institutions and how they're operating, but also, you how do we focus more of our care and our energy and our healing around healthy community, rebuilding healthy community, because that's what will give us a different sense of power, a different sense of possibility and things.

So that's a little bit about it. There's much more, many layers, but just to give you a sense.

Yeah, thank you for that. You know, I'm reminded in this, in this context of deadlihoods and the kind of modern condition and the economies that prevail as a result. There is and has been, especially in the last two centuries, this kind of not only degradation of community, but of course, the dissolution[00:35:00] of community and in the sense of people moving to the big city or other countries for better lives.

And sometimes necessarily. So like sometimes it's simply their only option, right?

And, this is very, very much evident to me in the work that I do here in Oaxaca. And you know, I had come across this declaration from 2009 in a, a very rural village in the Mixtec region of Oaxaca, where a group of peasant families from different villages alongside their migrant kin or family spoke for days about the consequences of their movements, and at the end of that three day assembly, declared alongside the right to migrate, the right to stay home and the right to not migrate, and so I'm kind of curious what kind of dynamics you've seen in India In terms of that economic impulse to [00:36:00] move, to leave the village, to migrate and maybe what part Swaraj and endeavors like it might play in those dynamics.

Yeah. So I think, part of it is you're saying is physically forced displacement due to development projects, massive development projects or war. But a lot of the displacement has been sold to people package as to people that the urban lifestyle or the American lifestyle is the lifestyle and what you're leading is impoverished, is insignificant, is backwards. You know, there's all kinds of ways. And so much of what education role was is to convince us that somehow the urban lifestyle is what is to be aspired for. So a lot of people move because of that. I have my experience with rural people and working with rural people is that a lot of them, they're like,

"we're quite happy where we're at. But what happens is when our cousin comes from the city, they bring [00:37:00] fancy phones and motorcycles and money and they show off and that's what really makes us feel really bad."

And then we have to, what we've tried to do is to counter that with, you know reminding people of what a shitty life urban life is.

Most people are living in slums. Most people are, if you're not, you're living under continuous stress and tension to make ends meet in polluted environments these days and lots of traffic. And so I at least, you know, try to remind people that in their villages, they may not have that many material things but they're the Kings of the village.

They have fresh air. They have clean places, good water to drink still. They have good food, fresh food they're eating. So that's been an interesting journey. Sometimes people understand, particularly the older people understand. This is the other thing that schooling played a major role is to try to kill the voices of wisdom.

So, like my grandmother or other elders would be [00:38:00] told, "Oh, you're uneducated. What do you know about what is a good life or what is, you know, the way forward? And so those voices still are silenced quite a bit because young people go to school for some years and then they think they are much more knowledgeable about what life is all about or what's important in life.

So, I think what's interesting is that what we're saying about the breakdown of what the urban success story was or the urban model, it's becoming more and more clear to people, like they're seeing that so there are people I know who are moving back. Udaipur is a very small city and a lot of people who have been connected with us have decided to stay in Udaipur rather than moving to Delhi or Bombay, which has been the trend.

And so I think it's a very important thing to keep looking at. I think if people see if they have a good life in smaller places, a lot of people are ready to come [00:39:00] back. Because the stress, the continuous stress and speed of big city life is I feel is taking a toll on people and also the whole promise is there's jobs and everything.

And so you see more and more unemployment also happening in big cities. So, I think there's an interesting question right now in people's minds of what, what to do and where to go.

So you know, it very much seems that one of the ways that what I'll call, I guess, well, either modern people or cultural Americans seem impoverished by is in the realm of hospitality. The lack of hospitality towards not only their neighbors at home, but, but abroad among hosts, you know, most people stay in hotels or Airbnbs. Most tourists anyways, they eat at chain restaurants. They're taught a transactional worldview and all exchange tends to end up in a customer service evaluation. And I feel that this is very much what [00:40:00] tourism has done to that part of the culture, that we would otherwise refer to as hospitality.

And so I'm curious in your opinion how would you define radical hospitality? And how have you seen it perhaps as an antidote for the industrial hospitality modern people so often encounter.

Yeah. I would that's a great question. So I think I've had the experience in being in Rajasthan of many traditions of hospitality and I would even say radical in the sense that all over India we say that " treat our guests like gods." So that's probably as radical as you could get with hospitality, if I treat you like a god, right? And what it means to me is, not to God in the sense of the pedestal of God or somebody remote, but actually God in the sense of this is my way [00:41:00] to find another connection to the divine in all of us, the divine that connects all of us.

And so when I am able to receive somebody with that spirit, I'm able to touch into something very deep within myself also. And we have so many traditions here which again, in our work, we're trying to recover and remind people, remember in different ways. I would just share a couple of things around that.

So one is like, in the desert, when it gets really hot up to 50 degrees Celsius, probably the most hospitable and sacred thing you can do is offer somebody water. So with the industrial consumer tourism, we have a parallel underground system happening.

So you can go to stores and you'll see bottled water, for example, where people are paying and they buy it. But if you kind of look closely, you'll see on almost every corner of the old city where, where [00:42:00] most of the tourists come, there are clay pots, which people fill up every day for which are called piaos.

So the tradition was that to offer any passerby, any stranger, water, is one of the highest gifts you can honor with them because it's so hot and so I've seen women fill water and carry it from even very far away to offer it to strangers, which is so humbling and so powerful that people would actually be able to offer this.

So you can see these pots, people are sitting there sometimes, sometimes the pots are just filled and left with a glass for people to fill themselves and drink. But this is a very powerful way to remind us that there is a different way to relate both to resources like water and how we see it, which is non commodified.

And so my grandmother would never think of charging money for water. If I ever told her, she'd be like, what is wrong with those [00:43:00] people? There must be some real deep sickness in them. "Let's go charge money for water." And so I think that, you know, that's an example of an entry to a different understanding of what is water, what is our relationship with each other and I wouldn't say what is water, almost you could say who is water. That question gets opened up as well through this act.

And so the other thing around radical hospitality and I care, I would say there's some traditions that are called guptan here, which is kind of the invisible giving tradition.

So a lot of what do you find, hospitality these days, is around showing off or people should know who's serving you and who's giving you. And here, there's another sense of care that is given where nobody knows who is the giver and to try to remove that arrogance of the giver when care is offered.

And so it's offered with a deep sense of service, but to try to remove the ego element that I am the giver, I'm the one who's [00:44:00] helping somebody or being hospitable to them in some way. So I think that's also been quite inspiring to me, how to enter into that real space of humility as part of a radical hospitality tradition.

And I think that these things do have a very essential role to play in challenging what's happening in the world and, and building different kinds of models and systems, because if care and connection is not part of that I don't know what the, what the new models, what they would stand on.

And so these are this has to be the foundation of something that can grow. And every time, you know, if you ask me every few years, it deepens and changes because of experiences here. When I first I heard about it from Gustavo. I was like, "Oh, this is so beautiful." But I had relatively little ideas of how it would actually look every day.

I see more and more examples of it in living practice here where I live. So yeah, it gives me a lot of hope that [00:45:00] maybe that's one of the keys to finding our way forward.

Well, thank you, Manish, for your time today and this wonderful, wonderful conversation. Before I let you go to sleep and probably tend to family, I'd like to ask, how might our listeners find out more about your work, about Swaraj University, and I know we didn't have time to speak about it, but the Ecoversities project.

Yeah, it's been wonderful to, to talk with you, Chris. I do hope that we can welcome you someday to Udaipur as well. The one thing I would say is that Swaraj University is part of this alliance, translocal alliance around the world called Ecoversities, so a network of like 500 plus alternative universities in 50 countries.

And the idea [00:46:00] was that, you know, these are, in a sense, kind of part of an underground railroad, if you would say for people who are walking out of the system or trying to figure out how they can live differently on the planet together. And the beautiful thing is that, you know, anyone can declare themselves an ecoversity, their community.

And there's a huge diversity of things, ranging from the farmversities and the forestversities and the riverversities to, you know, like deathversities and travelersversities grandmothers' universities and jail universities and all kinds of spaces. So, this is really to reclaim different kinds of knowledge systems and different learning processes that have never been valued by conventional universities.

And to maybe start to create a space, as I said, to live together, to reclaim our hands and our hearts and our bodies and [00:47:00] our homes as well as our holistic heads And to try to dream, to dream something together. So we have a website, we have gatherings, I would invite people to, to come and and visit us and connect with different eco overseas around the world.

I have a 21 year old daughter. She's been unschooled. She never looked at a textbook or an exam or a classroom really in her life, except, you know, like we took her to see children in a classroom, like you take kids to see animals in the zoo so she could see what it was like for a couple of days.

But so, you know, really wanted to create a model, not only, I mean, for myself, for her, for other young people to be able to learn and be in different kinds of communities and experiments around the world. So, we invite you all to help create the new models that the world needs with us.

I'll make sure that all of those links and [00:48:00] resources that you mentioned, Manish, are there on the End of Tourism website when the episode launches. And on behalf of our listeners, blessings on your day, your path, your tongue, and thank you so much for joining me today.

Thanks, Chris. Thanks for your wonderful work and good luck with the new projects that are emerging in your life.

Thank you, Manish.

Leave a comment

Subscribe now

#0.6 | Spectacle, The Senses and Surveillance w/ Chris Christou

Chris Christou — Thu, 23 May 2024 16:33:07 GMT

Show Notes

John Urry’s The Tourist Gaze

Photography

The Senses

Surveillance and Artificial Intelligence (AI)

Spectacle

Homework

Transcript

Welcome friends to Season Zero of the End of Tourism podcast. In these mini-episodes, you'll hear short transmissions speaking to the principles of the pod. We'll introduce you, our listeners, to the themes and questions that will be woven into our conversations, a kind of primer on our politics. This episode is entitled "Spectacle, the Senses and Surveillance."

[00:00:31] So we can't talk about tourism without talking about the senses without talking about spectacle and without talking about surveillance. How do people come to perceive new worlds, sensually? How do we smell, taste, touch, hear, and see in foreign lands? And how did tourism become such a spectacle, driven incessantly by cameras, vision, and consumption? How is it that our movements feed surveillance states and surveillance societies?

[00:01:09] The English sociologist, John Urry coined the phrase, "the tourist gaze." His work dove into the worlds and ways in which tourists see in foreign lands, the way they look, observe, and watch local people, the way they watch local places themselves, and even each other.

[00:01:32]Modern people move with their eyes. We have become intensely visual beings. Some would even say that we are hypnotized by the eyes. On average, the other senses amount for a combined 15% of our perception. But not every culture carries this sensorial imbalance like we do. In other words, this way of perceiving the world is not natural, but cultural.

[00:02:03]This is not only what tourists bring to other worlds, but how they arrive in them, how they understand or more often misunderstand other cultures, people and places, through this hypnosis. Western worldviews reflect the images that Western people have their travels. None of this is new. Since the Renaissance, travel writing, manufactured the image of the world for those back home. Before photography, travel writing was the only way to explain to the masses how far off lands appeared.

[00:02:43] Each traveling author, each trip reflected the histories and power dynamics and prejudices of the time. Today, the same thing happens with photography and with social media. On the podcast, we will look deeply into the stereoscope of media, both past and present to understand these unseen consequences.

[00:03:08] Today, it seems that Urry's "tourist gaze" is intimately hitched to the camera and to photography. Photography has been a part of travel and tourism since the first cameras in the mid-19th century. Today, however, with the inundation of smartphones and wifi worldwide, the amount of photos taken is astronomical. The total number of photos ever taken has doubled in the span of just a few years.

[00:03:36] Of course, this has its consequence in the world and especially in the places, tourists, visit. The smartphone with the capacity to connect to the internet almost anywhere is the most dangerous and effective Trojan horse of globalization. If there was ever a way to attack or subvert traditional culture and culture itself, the smartphone, the handset of modernity, is it. It bypasses barriers that might otherwise shield people from the consequences of foreign entitlement. As soon as it has a foothold, it converts local people faster than any missionary would.

[00:04:19]The relationships that exist in could exist between our human sensing and the natural or more-than-human world is a kind of birthright. We might even call it a birth-responsibility, but today they are often ignored and neglected in favor of technology. The senses themselves are dulled to the point where we require more technology simply in order to get by in our day-to-day lives.

[00:04:47] As the senses whither, so does the wonder and wisdom and the kinship with the local world that our ancestors apprenticed and entrusted to us. In turn, our senses are outsourced to higher resolutions and more megapixels. They are outsourced to the cloud. We must ask, then, what are the consequences for having neglected those relationships, for having forgotten that wisdom? What happens to the more-than-human worlds in our midst as a result?

[00:05:23] What do they imagine us to be doing as we abandon them and the ancestors among us who might've honored, such senses, such sensing, deepening our ancient inheritance.

[00:05:35]You see, this is what tourism does. Sometimes, people travel only to take photos that have already been taken millions of times. Tourists desire to carve out the meaningless notches on their belt, drawing more and more attention to the slow destruction of the very thing they photograph, now reduced to nothing more than a photo or a photo op.

[00:06:03]Each photo, each location, each reaction, like, in commentary is recorded and funneled into an artificial intelligence underground, where it is converted into ways of both reducing and controlling our attention. This is what sends thousands, if not millions of people to foreign destinations as hunters of experience and pseudo-status.

[00:06:30]The attention economy feeds tourism and tourism undoes everything that makes a place itself. Overtouristed cities are already implementing Machiavellian panopticons, the all seeing eyes of local governments. They are using over tourism itself as a pretext to install surveillance programs that track every movement in and out of these places. Entire cities and entire populations. This is already well underway in places like Venice, Italy.

[00:07:07] Likewise, governments and industry are already launching digital travel passports that will not only contain all government-related documents, but act as "surveillance by design" tracking devices. The data can then be evaluated in order to privilege certain travelers over others, not unlike what is being done in China right now with the social credit and rating system there. In every way, shape, and form tourism feeds the dream-slash-nightmare of a totalitarian world.

[00:07:43] It seems to me that in the west almost no one is not a tourist. Let me say that again. It seems to me that in the west, almost everyone is a tourist. Almost everyone is a tourist, which is to say that we have become amateurs and strangers in our own neighborhoods, in part, because the spectacle of modern life and its media has ennobled a way of being in the world and in the neighborhood that is both temporary and seemingly inconsequential.

[00:08:17] The way we see in foreign lands comes from the way we see at home. We don't arrive in destinations as tourists. We leave home as tourists. This comes from home being understood and known, in our time, as an option, as a feeling, and even as a photo op. When home is no longer a place, when home becomes a choice or a potential "base," the responsibility of place is left in the hands of governments, usually to be sold off to the highest bidder.

[00:08:58] Home is hit with a wave of consequences, not unlike the places tourists go to visit and often for the same reasons. For our listeners, this might sound dreary, lamentable, and even over the top, but consider that if this arises for you in these ways, it might do so as a result of these things arriving mostly unconsidered.

[00:09:25] These are dangerous times and to be properly in them to find ourselves as faithful witnesses to the times, will likely ask more than we're willing and to give. That's okay too, and probably expected.

[00:09:40] This is both strange and mandatory because the times we're living in have been abandoned by a touristic mindset. For many, the old, week-long vacation has now become a lifelong lifestyle choice. Wanderlust, in other words. Not just escape, but socially legislated abandonment.

[00:10:03]Spectacle that conceals the wilting of the senses. Spectacle that conceals the rise of surveillance societies. Spectacle, that we will approach these conversations in a way that, all willing, subverts spectacle. Finding worthy resistance strategies, staying home and standing in solidarity with touristed places and peoples so that we may find a worthy way to bury spectacle. Welcome to the end of tourism.

Leave a comment

Subscribe now

S5 #5 | Fortress Conservation in the Congo w/ Martin Lena & Linda Poppe (Survival International)

Chris Christou — Fri, 26 Apr 2024 13:01:42 GMT

On this episode, my guests are Martin Lena and Linda Poppe of Survival International. They join me to discuss “fortress conservation” in the Congo, the issues facing Kahuzi-Biega National Park, and the recent victories of Survival International there.

Linda is a political scientist and director of the Berlin office of Survival International, the global movement for Indigenous peoples' rights. She is also part of Survival’s campaign to Decolonize Conservation, which supports Indigenous peoples, who continue to suffer land theft and human rights abuses in the name of conservation.

Martin is an advocacy officer for Survival International. He primarily works on Survival’s campaign to Decolonize Conservation and has collected testimonies directly from communities facing violations of their rights in the name of conservation.

Subscribe now

Show Notes:

What Conservation Looks like in the Democratic Republic of the Congo

The Evictions of the Batwa

Safari Tourism in DRC Conflict

The Militarization of Conservation in Kahuzi-Biega National Park

Land Guards vs Land Guardians

Organizing Victory! Scrapping French Involvement in Kahuze-Biega

The German Government Continues to Fund the Park

Solidarity: How to Respond / Act in Concert

Homework:

Survival International: French government scraps funding plan for Kahuzi-Biega National Park, citing human rights concerns

Survival International Decolonize Conservation Campaign

Balancing Act: The Imperative of Social and Ecological Justice in Kahuzi-Biega

Transcript:

Chris: [00:00:00] Welcome to the End of Tourism Podcast, Martin and Linda. I'd love it if I could start by asking you two to explain to our listeners where you two find yourselves today and what the world looks like there for you.

Linda: Well, hi everyone. My name is Linda. I work for Survival International and I'm in Berlin. I'm at home, actually, and I look forward to talking to you and chatting with you.

It's dark outside already, but, well, that's, I guess, the time of the year.

Martin: And I'm based in Paris, also at home, but I work at Survival's French office. And how does the world feel right now? It feels a bit too warm for October, but other than that.

Chris: Well, thank you both for for joining me today. I'd like to begin by reminiscing on the season three interview that I had with your colleague Fiore Longo, entitled "Decolonizing Conservation in Africa and Beyond."

And in that interview, we discussed the history [00:01:00] of conservation as colonization in the context of Tanzania and the national parks that were built there and the indigenous lands that were stolen in order to do so. I'm curious if you two could offer a bit of background for our listeners in terms of the history of conservation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo and especially in regards to the Batwa people and the Kahuzi Biega National Park.

Linda: We were quite you know, astonished of the colonial history that, we find in the park where we're here to discuss today. Well, the Congo, obviously, you know, was a colony. And I think in this context, we also need to look at the conservation that is happening in the DRC today.

And a lot of the things that you have discussed with our colleague, feel very true for the DRC as well. And the, the park that we're going to look at today, I think it's probably [00:02:00] also the best example to start to explain a little bit what conservation looks like in DRC. It's an older park, so it was created a longer time ago, and it was always regarded as something that is there to protect precious nature for people to look at and not for people to go and live in.

And this is exactly what the problem is today, which we see continues, that the people that used to live on this land are being pushed outside violently, separated from the land which they call home, which is everything for them, the supermarket, the church, the school, just in the name of conserving supposed nature.

And unfortunately, this is something that we see all over the DRC and different protected areas that exist there, that we still follow this colonial idea of mostly European [00:03:00] conservationists in history and also currently that claim that they're protecting nature, often in tandem with international conservation NGOs.

In the park we look at today, it's the Wildlife Conservation Society, and they're, yeah, trying to get rid of the original inhabitants that have guarded these spaces for such a long time.

Martin: To build on that, in our campaign to decolonize conservation and survival, we often say that fortress conservation has deep colonial roots and you can definitely see that with the the actual history of the of Kahuzi Biega National Park because it started as a reserve that was created by the Belgian colonial government in 1937 and It was transformed into a national park after independence.

So in the 70s, but it was still designated as such following the lobbying of a Belgian conservationist. So it's really the continuation the Western and the European will to keep controlling the, [00:04:00] the independent territories. And that in Africa oftentimes was done through conservation.

Linda: And it also has this idea of, I think a lot of the conservation projects that we see, Martin just said it, there was also this post independence push on creating national parks, which was obviously related to the idea that Europeans might lose hold of control in certain areas, so they were pushing for the creation of national parks like the Kahuzi Biega National Park.

And that is the setting that we're talking about, basically, something that has very colonial roots and has been pushed into the post colonial era, but in a way which is actually very colonial.

Chris: Thank you both for that brief, brief history and introduction into what we'll be speaking about today, Linda, you mentioned that so many of the circumstances around the creation of these national parks includes the exclusion and [00:05:00] displacement of the original inhabitants.

And in this case, among others, this includes the Batwa people. And so I'd like to just give our listeners a little bit of a context for what's happened to the Batwa in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. And so the statistics tell us that "over 90 percent of the 87, 000 indigenous Batwa people in the park have lost legal access to their native territory, turned into conservation areas, and who are desperately poor," according to a 2009 United Nations report.

Now, in a recent Reuters article, it's written that, quote, "Local human rights and environmental experts say that the authorities failure to fulfill promises to the Batwa has undermined efforts to protect the forest and its endangered species, including some of the last populations of eastern lowland gorilla.

Some of the Batwa around the [00:06:00] park participate in the illegal poaching, mining, and logging that are destroying the gorilla's globally significant habitat. As a result, the conservation outlook for the park is critical, according to the International Union for Conservation of Nature." The article goes further and says that "the Batwa have no choice because they are poverty stricken, according to Josue Aruna, president of the province's environmental civil society group, who does community outreach for the Batwa."

It seems in this way that the land rights and traditional lifestyles of the Batwa are intimately tied to the health and survival of the ecosystems within the national park, which they've been excluded from, and that their poverty is a consequence of their displacement. Do you think that the issue is as simple as that?

Martin: It's always interesting to read these reports from the conservationists, whether it's the IUCN or the NGOs, because the problem is always "the local people. So they are poor and they [00:07:00] have no choice. They participate in poaching." and it's always their fault.

Like you were saying, if they end up being poor it's because they were evicted from the land. And as Linda was saying earlier, the forest and the land more generally is everything to them or was everything to them. So it's not only the place where they get food, it's also the whole basis of their identity and their way of life.

So once they lose that, they end up in our world, capitalist system, but at the lowest possible level. So, that's why they end up in poverty. But it's a problem that was created by the conservationists themselves. And even when you read Their discourse or their position about trying to improve the situation for the Batwa, it's always about generating revenue ,lifting them out of poverty, developing alternative livelihoods. But what we are campaigning for is not some alternative to the loss of their rights. It's Their land rights themselves. And to go to your other question [00:08:00] about the fact that the loss of their land rights has led to a degrading in the health of the ecosystem.

I think, yes, for sure. That has been the case, and it's what we're seeing all around the world in these protected areas that are supposed to protect nature. But actually, once you evict the best conservationists and the people that were taking care of the land for decades, then there is room for all kinds of exploitation whether it be mass tourism or luxury safaris or even mining and logging concessions.

So it's not a coincidence if 80 percent of the biodiversity on the planet is located in indigenous territories. It's because they have lived in the land. It's not wild nature. They have lived there for generations. They have protected it and they have shaped it through their practices. So, to us, the best way to protect this ecosystem is to ensure that their land rights are respected and blaming them for poaching or putting that on the fact that they are poor, it's just [00:09:00] dishonest and ignoring the basis of the problem.

Linda: Yeah. I agree. And when you just read out these sentences, I noted down like the way it was formulated, as a result, the park is threatened. It's again, just focusing on the local people as being the problem. Like the protected areas, they are to protect an area from the local people, which I think becomes very clear in the way you explained it. And also, like, Martin, I'm quite struck by the idea that they talk about poor people, but ignoring that, you know, their actions that of the Batwa have also caused this poverty. So it's, in a way, you know, first you make people poor and then you kind of insult them almost for being poor and then, you know, acting accordingly.

I think that is quite, you know, ignoring what has happened. And I think it's the same with [00:10:00] the general model of conservation. Like the sentences you read, I mean, there is some sympathy in it, you know, it sounds like, "oh, these poor people," you know, "in a way we regret what has happened and that they were evicted."

But it's like "those poor people," they don't really look at, you know, why were they evicted and what are the consequences for our kind of conservation today? Like the consequence could be that the Batwa can return to their land because they are the best guardians and because it would give them a base to, to live, not in poverty.

So that consequence, they don't see it's because they ignore all the things that have caused the supposed poverty and have caused this kind of conservation that we see. So, don't think about what we've done in the past, we'll just go on, but that is a problem because they don't learn any lessons from what has happened and that land rights should be so important.

Chris: Yeah, I think that it definitely points towards this notion that I think a lot of people are becoming apt to in our [00:11:00] times in these days, which is the general kind of approach to the dilemmas in these contexts are to look at the symptoms of the dilemma and not the causes.

And in the context of the eviction and exile, displacement of the Batwa people, one of the articles mentions that "one of the consequences of the induced poverty includes the endangering and further endangering of the eastern lowland gorilla." And I mention this because in my research leading up to this interview, this conversation, I looked into the tourism offerings in Kahuzi Biega, in the National Park, and I found the following.

I'm just gonna read off a list of what I did find.

" Gorilla safaris, or trekking. Chimpanzee Rehabilitation Center tours. Camping safaris. Cultural tours. Bird [00:12:00] watching. Hiking. Climbing and boat cruises."

And so my next question is this. To what extent does the safari tourism in the national park play a part in this conflict?

Linda: Oh, that's a super interesting question. I mean, it obviously depends on the specific park that you look at. But I think I would say in almost any national park that we look at in Survival, there is some kind of idea that this park needs to have tourists. Tourists need to come and go and see the beauty of nature, ideally Western tourists, so that they become involved in conservation and donate money, and also in a way that tourism would be a way to pay for services that are related to maintaining the park.

So it's something that usually always pops up. It's kind of, it's like twins a little bit. And, you know, I, I work on, on [00:13:00] mostly German politics and how they relate to this conservation. And it's something that you can't really separate where you read about conservation projects that the German government funds, you will always also read about tourism.

So they're very interlinked. In some parks, you know, there isn't a lot of tourism because the situation is not very attractive to western tourists, but the idea is always there. And then the extent to which tourism actually happens obviously differs and then has different effects. In some parks that we work on, There's a lot of tourism, there's a lot of creation of infrastructure for tourists, hotels, for roads, for tourist vehicles to go places.

Then it obviously has a much stronger impact on the area and also on the people that live there. If there are less tourists, then the actual effect of tourism is, of course, a little bit less than it might sound in these proposals to have tourists there at all.

Chris: In the [00:14:00] context of conflict zones, which from what I understand this particular park in the Congo is a conflict zone, or at least parts of it, that tourism can act as a kind of barrier between local populations or local ecologies and the consequences of those conflict zones, right? But it doesn't necessarily stop the conflict. It just turns it underground, it turns a kind of blind eye to it, waiting, in most instances that I know of, until the organized crime in the area ends up getting, you know, their hands into the economy of, of the tourism itself.

Martin: Yeah, I mean, I agree with Linda that it's always there and it's always under the discourse and it's never only about conservation, there's always tourism. And often the national parks are created for this purpose. If you read the UNESCO definition or the IUCN definition of what a national park is, it says it's also for [00:15:00] recreation.

So these places are built for tourists. against the locals. So, yeah, it's always there and it's even in the definition.

Linda: So yeah, when you said tourism is a barrier in some cases tourism can amplify the problems that are there because there is more eviction or there's more interest of, for example, governments to evict people, to create this great picture of nature, which is so attractive to tourists.

So I think, I would find it as something that can really worsen the situation. I think from what I've seen, you know. We sometimes talk about sustainable tourism or respectful tourism, but in the terms of conservation projects, my impression really is that it's been harmful.

And the indigenous populations that work in tourism, which is one of the things that funders of conservation projects often [00:16:00] say, that they can find jobs in tourism. A lot of these jobs are not very good. And I would argue that a lot of times people need to take these jobs because they have lost the choice to not take a job and live from the forest.

Chris: Yeah, it's an interesting thing to wonder about in the little research that I did around what's happening in this particular park in the Congo, that there are rebel groups. It is a conflict zone, and yet there are these tourism offerings, right? And that surely, the champions of the National Park and conservation and in many areas would say, "well, you know, the more, the more tourism we can get in here the more we can undermine at least the economic causes if not the political ones that are contributing to the violence," when in fact, from what I can understand from Survival's work, that this is just deepens the causes that produced that conflict and that exile in the first place.

Linda: Yeah. And I think there's also [00:17:00] perception of injustice, which we shouldn't underestimate. I mean, if you're an indigenous person that has been violently evicted or whose family has been violently evicted from a certain area, and then you see, Western tourists mostly, which are rich, you know, pay a lot of money for these trips, are allowed to go in and use that area in a way. I think that also creates, yeah, a sense of injustice, which is also, yeah, it's quite, quite sad.

Chris: Mm hmm. Definitely. And then that's certainly what we see in over touristed places around the world and in places that are just starting to become over touristed, this kind of deep resentment amongst locals for the inequalities, the growing inequalities and yeah, as well, the injustices that these industries bring.

And so on that point of conflict zones, especially in and around Kahuzi Biega. I wanted to ask you both a question around the militarization of conservation. So, [00:18:00] some people believe that militarized park police, which is what exists in this park, are a necessary evil.

Officially, at least, "the guards protect the park from armed militias or rebel groups in the area, ensuring that they stay out of the park." Of course, those who they confront and sometimes attack also include the indigenous people, the Batwa in this case, who are trying to retake and reclaim their ancestral lands.

And the argument is that without the guards, the land would fall into the hands of much more malevolent groups or forces. And so how do you think the presence of armed conflict as well as militarized conservation guards complicates the issue?

Linda: That's a tough question. Well, maybe I can just give like a little anecdote.

It was actually about this park, the [00:19:00] Kahuzi Biega National Park, and we were talking to German politicians and government officials about the problem of conflict and about the problem that these park rangers you know, are trained and have a lot of weapons, which seems very militant. And they, they were seeing the problem.

They were seeing that this is probably not the best thing they should do, support security forces in an area which is already so problematic. But their thinking was, if we don't give them the money, now we have created this this force, basically. We have hired people, we have trained them.

Now, if we stop supporting them, what are they going to do? You know, they're gonna maybe take the training and their weapons and make it even worse. So in a way, I mean, this was off record, right? They were just kind of thinking out loud. But in a way, they were seeing that the projects that they have supported have created structures which [00:20:00] very likely will increase conflict.

And it seems quite obvious also because you see all these conflicts with indigenous peoples. So, I'm not going to say that it's a very peaceful area and there is not a need maybe for people to defend themselves. But in a way, the structures that we have in militarized conservation are not the solution.

You know, they make the situation much more complicated than it initially was. And now, like, in this park, we're in a situation where we witness terrible human rights abuses, and everyone's scared to act and do something because it could get even worse. And it's, yeah, it doesn't seem like a very good solution.

I think we need another way. We can't just stick our head, and say, oh, you know, we just go on, we'll just go on and then let someone else deal with it in a few years. I don't think that's a very good solution. Very good example.

Martin: And it's questionable also to what extent do these these guards, these armed [00:21:00] rangers actually protect the, the parks and the species because they are here supposedly to fight against illegal wildlife trade and poaching and everything.

But what studies have shown is that the root cause of of poaching and of the, of the illegal wildlife trade is mostly the demand for such products that comes from industrialized countries or at least other parts of the world and the system is made for the guards to take action against the local population and not against the actual criminal networks that lead to illegal wildlife trade and poaching.

They get money for people they arrest and the easiest people to find are the locals that are trying to get to their ancestral lands. And there's also sometimes the park management involved in these criminal networks. So, you pretend to put in place a system to fight against illegal wildlife trade, but there ends up being no choice but [00:22:00] for the guards to, to take on the local people.

Linda: Maybe we should also think about the indigenous populations as guards, or maybe guardians is the better word, of this area. And if we zoom out of the DRC and look at South America, where we have much stronger land rights... it's not perfect, but of course, better for indigenous people.

They often act as guardians or guards of these territories, even though they're also confronted with illegal logging, quite brutal illegal logging, for example. But in a way, they are there and they, of course, are supported by authorities ideally, in defending these territories, but you see a less violent or militarized conflict because you have the indigenous guardians, as opposed to starting out with their protected [00:23:00] areas and armed guards, which are not just there to defend themselves, but have extensive rights of use of violence, and they don't have to fear any repercussions if something goes wrong and they kill, for example, an indigenous person.

I mean, that's what we've seen in this park, that they can basically act with impunity.

Chris: And thank you, Linda, for offering that example of the difference or the contrast between places like the Kahuzi Biega National Park and the DRC and other places in South America, for example, where there is this inherited intergenerational understanding of guardianship and while there's only maybe a half a century of conservation industry in these places, of course, they're an extension of the colonial project or projects that were undertaken much further back in time in places like Africa and places like the DRC before it was known as such.

And then what happens, you know, after X amount of [00:24:00] generations after this kind of exile and displacement, that there is no lived memory anymore of what it means to be a guardian of your place. And I don't just mean as a title, but in terms of how you guard that place, as an indigenous person.

We might be able to say that the Western world or the modern world that that's very much what we've become is people who are unable to remember or have a lived memory of what it's like to adequately stand as guardians for a place. You know, I think with the work that you two in Survival International are doing, there's a path forward towards that.

And I'd like to remind our listeners that we're also here speaking today in part because there was a victory that was won by Survival International on behalf of the Batwa people and activists like yourself. And so I'd like to just read very briefly from [00:25:00] July 2023 press release from Survival International, in which it is said that, quote,

"in a landmark decision, the French government has scrapped its plan to fund the controversial Kahuzi Biega National Park in the Democratic Republic of the Congo."

France's Minister of State for Development, francophonie and International Partnerships, Chrysoula Zacharopoulou, confirmed that the plan to begin financing the Kahuzi Biega National Park has been scrapped. Ms. Zacharopoulou said, quote, "It has been abandoned, in line with our requirement for the respect of human rights."

So first of all, I'd like to say congratulations to you both and to your teams at Survival for for getting this this victory and for doing the work you need to do in order to get there. And I'd like to [00:26:00] ask about the strategies that were employed in order to revoke French support for the park. You know, so many of these efforts and victories are either ignored in the context of the endless dilemmas or they're celebrated kind of superficially without considering the work it took to organize such campaigns.

And so my question is, how has this campaign been organized by Survival International?

Martin: Well, to give a bit of context the first time we heard about the French Development Agency planning on funding Kahuzi Biega, it was in the exact same time period as the publication of a report by Minority Rights Group International detailing brutal waves of violence in 2019 and until 2020 of appalling human rights abuses. So, atrocities that including murder, torture, rape [00:27:00] the burning alive of children, the burning of villages. So, we are, in this context, where we are reading the minority rights group report and understanding the scale of these waves of violence against the Batwa.

And around the same period, we see that the French Development Agency has been a delegation, including the director, has been to the park and plans on funding it. So, of course we are appalled and and decide to write to the French Development Agency, but also to the to the ministry that has oversight.

So, one of them is the Ministry for Foreign Affairs. And then we wait. And then we also got the support of a senator who also sent a letter and asked a question in Parliament to the government about their plan to fund this park in the context of these human rights violations.

And so in July 2022, so last year, they decided to suspend temporarily the project. It was also in the context of an internal scandal because there was an expert[00:28:00] in the field and contracted by the French development agency to carry out a feasibility study. And he was basically saying around, and it can be heard in recordings saying that basically the study is just a formality and that the decision to fund the park has already been made.

So there's both scandals. An internal scandal about the due diligence apparently being considered a formality on the field and the scandal of the very detailed report that had just gone out about the atrocities. So, that led to a temporary suspension. And they said that they would conclude the study and look into the abuses into social aspects.

And then a year passed and we kept sending letters, of course, and doing some public campaigning about it on social media, et cetera. And then the senator asked again a question in July this year, and that's when we learned that the project was cancelled. So, of course, it's a victory, and it shows that sometimes the government actually does have the oversight[00:29:00] on the development agencies and takes the right decisions.

But, of course, it's just the whole model still needs to be challenged and the park still has many international backers, even in the context of the atrocities that we that we know about.

Chris: Mm. So the senator that asked about the status of the funding and found out that it was in fact scrapped, the scrapping of the funding was never made public until that point?

Or there was never any press release saying so?

Martin: No, they made it public, In the answer to the question, orally, in, in commission in Parliament.

Chris: Mm. And would there be no way that the French public, for example, would be able to find out about this otherwise?

Martin: I don't think so. And to be honest, I'm not even sure the decision had been taken before. I think they looked into it again because the senator asked a question again, but that's just speculation.

Chris: And you spoke about writing letters, obviously to politicians and to the ministries [00:30:00] and also social media campaigns. Do you think there was more of an effect on the scrapping of the funding because of the public campaign, the social media campaign?

Martin: Yeah, I think and that's basically the whole premise on which our campaigns are based is that an efficient mobilization of the public opinion will lead and the fact that the public cares and is informed will lead to a more efficient lobbying and advocacy of the governments and, and other government agencies.

So yeah, I think one can't go without the other. And I don't know what would have happened if only the Senator had asked the questions or if only the Senator had asked a question or if we had only sent a letter and no public campaigning at all, or no press release, or no social media, I don't know. So I think, yeah, both go hand in hand.

Chris: Mm hmm.

So do you think that without the report from the Minority Rights Group, that the funding would have gone ahead, regardless of what was actually happening there?

Martin: It's possible because we know that the funders were aware for years and [00:31:00] years of the human rights violations. And even before the waves of violence that are described in the report, we know that they were aware of that risk of violence at that time and of the human rights violation in the whole context of the militarized park.

So, I think it could have very well gone ahead, because the other funders knew and kept funding it. And yeah, it's very important to get that kind of report with very detailed testimonies and information from the ground, and really documenting these atrocities. Otherwise, it's just business as usual.

Chris: And the original proposal for the funding at least by the French government or the ministries involved, they were basically just promoting conservation in the way that it typically is. That's what the funding was for?

Martin: Well, it's hard to know because they never published anything and actually, they never actually started funding it.

It was just, just a project. Like I said, they went on a visit there and started making [00:32:00] promise to the local conservation agencies and to the local authorities. It's not clear to this day what exactly they were planning on funding, but it was clearly stated that there were planning on supporting the park itself, but I don't know for which kind of activities, but still, funding the same structure that that has been responsible for these abuses is still unacceptable.

Chris: Mm hmm sounds "sketchy," as we say in English. And and so for our listeners, just a little bit of further context while France simply abandoned plans, the country had not yet made, or the government had not yet made, Germany continues to finance the park despite France's, however, subtle acknowledgment of human rights violations.

And so, Linda, my question for you is, first of all, why is Germany funding a national park in the DRC to begin with? And, if you know, [00:33:00] how does that money get spent?

Linda: Well, I guess the, the German interest in this park is pretty old, so the German government started funding the park already in the 80s.

And there were some other projects even before that, supposedly. But it's considered to be a very, well, it obviously is a very long running project financed by the German government. And some local people call it the German park, because they assume that without the German funding, it wouldn't even exist. Like the kind of money that has been given over decades and the kind of things that have been funded, the infrastructure, the Congolese conservation authorities, the park rangers, you know, all the things that were funded basically crucial for the park to function. So yeah, it is a very German funded project. And also the German government has for very, a very long time looked at it as being a prestigious [00:34:00] project.

You know, it was this great park, the gorillas, you already mentioned it, you know, and the Germans been funding it, which when you know a bit about German history, post World War II, there was a lot of interest in biodiversity and conservation funding because it was a good thing to do, which gave Germany a little bit of a different international picture than it had after the war.

So there was a lot of interest in funding projects, and they were perceived as being fantastic, and they were shown to be these great projects that Germany is supporting internationally. And then, obviously, it isn't, but the German government has been very, very good at denying that there are these problems, and the role that it has had in facilitating these horrific human rights abuses. Mm.

Chris: And how, if at all, has the German government responded to the [00:35:00] scrapping of the French funding?

Linda: Very good timing, because I just got a response today, actually from the German government. Mm. 'cause we did point out to them that the French government has decided to not fund the park because of the violations of indigenous people's rights and because of human rights concerns.

So we pointed this out to the ministry again, just in case, they would not have learned about this themselves. But the reply basically doesn't address this at all. You know, this was what we wrote the letter about and the replies about all the great things that the German government keeps funding and the improvements it is supposedly seeing on the ground and these improvements justifying their continued support.

So it's just a letter explaining why they continue funding it and not addressing why maybe partners like the French government have decided not to fund it. And it's something that we have seen over the years. I think [00:36:00] survival first raised human rights violations in the Kahuzi Biega National Park in actually 2017, so that's quite a few years ago.

There was a Batwa family. A father with his son, a teenage son. They were going into the park to collect herbs for medicine because another son of the family was sick. They encountered park rangers who killed the teenager and hurt wounded the father. So it was quite a terrible incident.

And the father wrote to the German government, to the funders, and he complained about these human rights violations and the fact that the Batwa had lost access to the park and to their livelihood because of the German funding. The German government just said, "well, you know, there's not much we can do about it, basically."

They tried to pay some money, but then really nothing, nothing else happened. And over the years, the situation hasn't improved. It has [00:37:00] gotten worse. But the German government keeps saying that they have faith in the Congolese conservation authorities and they do not see grounds to stop the funding or the project.

They keep saying that they see progress. And things will get better. And we know it hasn't gone better.

Chris: I'd like to return anyways to this this question around tactics and strategies and organizing. It seems that activists and those not directly involved in social movements struggle with the weight of our times.

I mean, it's you know, kind of hard to ignore these days. And so, given that the German government, I imagine, is the obvious next target in the campaign to defund Kahuzi Biega, or at least the conservation authorities and programs there, what tactics, what strategies are being employed by Survival in your campaigns, [00:38:00] and how might our listeners in Germany, France, Europe, and, and beyond, how might they participate?

Linda: That's a very good question, because, as I said, you know, Survival has been working on this for a few years, and there's a little bit of frustration, of course, that not much is happening in the terms of acknowledging the problem of funding this park. I think what Survival, what we're thinking is, quite important in this issue of conservation is making sure that donors in the West understand that this is a very symptomatic problem.

So, a lot of conservation projects function like this and it is because there is this underlying problem with them, that they do not acknowledge land rights. But they continue to say that certain government authorities or certain conservation organizations are best put to run these places. It's the same with the [00:39:00] Kahuzi Biega National Park.

The German government now says, "well, we know there are problems, so we pull in the WCS. They're the conservation organization and everything will be better. But it won't because they also have a record of not respecting indigenous people's rights. So, we need to make them understand that there is this underlying issue of not acknowledging indigenous people's land rights.

And we try to do this by pointing out that this is a problem which is happening in a lot of national parks. So, protected areas that Survival has looked at in Africa and Asia, almost all of them, even the ones that we were told were good examples, have these problems. And we try to show that to the donors that have such big impact on these conservation projects and make them rethink what they're doing.

It's a very difficult process, of course, because they've always done it in a different way. And now it's hard for them to think [00:40:00] about, you know, giving control and power to local people, which until now they've always said is a threat to conservation. It's like a total turn of what they assumed so far.

But for us, it seems like that's the thing that we have to do for them to actually acknowledge the problem, because otherwise all the solutions that they come up with are not real solutions. They put people like the WCS in power, which is also not going to respect the Batwas' rights.

Chris: Yeah, I think one of the critiques around development is in the context of these industries, especially things like conservation, volunteerism is another one that as industries, you would imagine that they would have in their mission statement, or vision, or ten-year plan, the slow and intentional disappearance of their own industry, right? Because if what they were [00:41:00] doing was working, we would need less of them. And there would be less of them, but here we are, right? And it's just, of course, a massively growing industry, both conservation and volunteerism.

Martin: Yeah, it's true that our key targets are the donors, because like many of the issues that indigenous peoples are facing across the world, the root of the problem and the funding for these problems come from the West and our societies.

So that's going to remain one of our targets and key part of the strategy. I think we are starting to see a shift in the discourse, in France, at least. And when we talk to the politicians, we also see that shift, that shift in the discourse of the conservation NGOs, but it's still as harmful.

So instead of saying that these places are wild and empty and that the local artists are destroying it or encroaching, well, they still say it, but they also say that what we were saying before about the poverty issue and that [00:42:00] they will generate new projects and new activities and development basically.

So, I think that they are starting to acknowledge the presence of these people. They couldn't be further from recognizing their land rights because, like you said, otherwise it means their own disappearance, and they're not built for that.

Linda: Yeah, so it's a difficult, it's a difficult thing. I mean, I think we try to talk to people that are more inclined to understand the importance of indigenous people's rights so that we can have a base of people that support our campaigning, which is very important for us.

And then we select our targets and try to engage the people that support us in convincing these targets to change projects or change their minds. And sometimes, you know, that can just be it a tweet that texts someone who we know makes decisions about certain [00:43:00] projects, try to raise awareness that there is concern about this project, that some people disagree, that this doesn't comply with human rights, that this doesn't comply with, agreements or treaties they're supporting for indigenous people's rights.

And sometimes it's a more complex lobbying strategy. So there are different things we try to do and sometimes, like we saw with the example of the French government, sometimes it works because there's timing, there's different things coming together. But obviously, even though we have a lot of strategies, it's always difficult to know what will work in the end.

So we try different things and try to engage with people that will help us spread the word about the need to decolonize conservation and do it differently and acknowledge land rights. And sometimes it's little things that really change a lot. Sometimes we work on something for a long time and it wasn't the right strategy and we need to change.[00:44:00]

Chris: Well, speaking of how might our listeners find out more about Survival International and the decolonize conservation campaigns and especially around the work that you two are doing.

Martin: Well, I strongly encourage people to read more of our campaigns on the website, on social media, also to subscribe to our newsletter, because that's where we mostly share our urgent actions.

So which are one of our tools to put pressure on the targets. So, mass emails basically sent by our supporters to the targets about specific projects. And we also publish some video, direct video testimonies in our tribal voice projects, as we call it.

So if they want to listen to, to the victims explaining the problems they are facing, but also the way of life that they have lost or sometimes more inspiring things about the resistance and and the fight. I think it's also very interesting to hear directly from the people affected.

But yeah, I strongly encourage people to join the movement by [00:45:00] any means possible. And sometimes as Linda said, just small actions like a tweet or sending an email through these campaigns can be can really make an impact and and it does help ensure that the advocacy and the lobbying is effective.

Linda: Yeah, and I think it's also a nice way to picture that you're showing solidarity with, for example, the Batwa, who often perceive the Western donors as being the cause of their problem. And I think for them, it's nice to see that there are also people in the countries that, where the problems originate that are standing up for their rights and supporting them.

And I think it's probably the least we can do also, because we're so obsessed with African nature that I think it would be a very good step for us to think about the people that live in these places.

Chris: Yeah, absolutely. And maybe not immediately or superficially in part because of the inundations and the dilemmas in our times, but that kind of [00:46:00] solidarity can begin to break down as well, the largely like unconscious nationalist tendencies we have when we think of other people in other countries, we always associate those people with their governments, right?

Which is just like, absolutely ridiculous when anyone thinks of themselves in relation to their own government, right? But these are two faces, two voices of the resistance that are working on behalf of many others.

And so I just wanted to reiterate that we're here today just to have the chance to be able to speak about a little bit about this this small victory that all willing will lead to many more to much bigger ones in regards to the Decolonize Conservation campaign of Survival International.

It takes work and I'm grateful to be able to speak with you both today and to have you share some of your work and your dedication with our listeners and I will make sure that all of those links that you mentioned, Martin, will be on the End of Tourism website and available for our [00:47:00] listeners to sign up to the newsletter and follow on social media and of course participate if they so wish.