7/24/2019 D Poole nuevas cronicas del peru.pdf
1/60
http://www.jstor.org
The New Chroniclers of Peru: US Scholars and Their 'Shining Path' of Peasant RebellionAuthor(s): Deborah Poole and Gerardo ReniqueSource: Bulletin of Latin American Research, Vol. 10, No. 2 (1991), pp. 133-191Published by: Blackwell Publishing on behalf of Society for Latin American StudiesStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3338175Accessed: 31/08/2008 21:34
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.
Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=black.
Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit organization founded in 1995 to build trusted digital archives for scholarship. We work with the
scholarly community to preserve their work and the materials they rely upon, and to build a common research platform that
promotes the discovery and use of these resources. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].
http://www.jstor.org/stable/3338175?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=blackhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=blackhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/3338175?origin=JSTOR-pdf7/24/2019 D Poole nuevas cronicas del peru.pdf
2/60
Bull.
LatinAm.
Res.,
Vol.
10,
No.
2,
pp.
133-191,
1991. 0261-3050/91S3.00
+
.00
Printed
n
GreatBritain.
Society
for LatinAmerican
Studies
Pergamon
Press
plc
The NewChroniclers fPeru:US Scholarsand
their
Shining
ath'
of
PeasantRebellion
DEBORAH
POOLE
New
Schoolfor
Social
Research,
New
York,
USA
and
GERARDO
RENIQUE
CityCollegeofNew York,USA
'Elpapel
aguanta
odo
'-(Peruvian
proverb)
INTRODUCTION
On
19
April
1980,
Abimael
Guzmain,
ecretary
general
of the
Partido
Comunistadel Peru
'Sendero
Luminoso'
(PCP-SL)
gave
a
speech
in
the
closing
session
of
the
party's
first
military
school. The
school
had been
created
ollowing
he 1978
Ninth
Central
Committee
Plenary
n
which
PCP-
SL leaders declaredthat theirpartyhadcompleteda processof consolida-
tion
and was therefore
eady
o
assume ts role as the
revolutionary
anguard
for the Peruvian
working
lass.
Guzman's 980
speech
marked he
beginning
of
yet
another
tage
n
which
he
party
would
now
initiate
he armed
struggle:
Somos los
iniciadores.
Comenzamos
iciendo
omos los
iniciadores,
er-
minamos
diciendo somos los
iniciadores.
gIniciadores
de
que?
De
la
guerra
opular,
de la
lucha
armada,
que
estden
nuestras
manos,
brillaen
nuestra
mente,
palpita
en nuestro
orazon,
e
agita
ncontenible n
nuest-
ras voluntades.
Eso es lo
que
somos. Un
puhado
de
hombres,
de
comu-
nistas,
acatando
el mandato
delpartido,delproletariado delpueblo.
1
One month
later,
members
of
the PCP-SL
burnt
presidential
electoral
ballots
n
the rural
own of
Chuschi
(Cangallo
province,
department
f
Ayac-
ucho).
The
followingday
other PCP-SL
militants
abotaged
he
air
control
tower
n
the
departmental
apital
of
Ayacucho.
A
month
ater,
hey
attacked
the
police
infirmary,
government-sponsored
ouristhotel and the
political
headquarters
f
the
then
governing
party
Acci6n
Popular)
n
the
same
city.
Later
hat
month,
n
their
most
spectacular
ttack,
hey
burntdown
the muni-
cipalbuilding
n
the
working-class
istrict
of San
Martin
de
Porras,
half
a mile
from
the Plazade
Armas
and
seat
of
government
n
the
Peruvian
apitalcity
of Lima.In the nextmonths,theytargettedminingcamps,governmentand
municipal
ffices,
electrical
and
communications
ffices
and the tombof
the
former
PresidentJuan
Velasco
Alvarado.
These
actionswere meant
o mark
the
co-ordinated
and
interdependent
atureof
the
PCP-SL's wo
theatresof
military
operation:
he
sparsely
populated
and
impoverished
Andean
coun-
tryside
and the
urban
political
and economic
power
centres
situated,
or
the
7/24/2019 D Poole nuevas cronicas del peru.pdf
3/60
BULLETIN
OF
LATIN
AMERICANRESEARCH
most
part,
on
Peru'sPacificcoast.
The
objective
f
the armedacts
carried ut
in
these two arenas
was to
destroy
he Peruvian tate and constructa 'New
Democracy'.2
Unbeknown o the membersof this Peruvian oliticalparty, heiractions
also
gave
birthto
another
group
of
political deologues
whose
careers,
ike
those
of
Sendero's
militants,
would
come to
depend
on
both the
unfolding
political
truggle
n Peru
andUS
foreign
policy.
This
new
group
was
formed
of
US
scholars,
rained
n
the
disciplines
of
political
cience,
sociology
and
anthropology,
ut now
specialising
n
the
study
of Sendero's
place
in
the
Peruvian
political
arena.As US
foreign
policy regroups
around he
newly
emergent
vilsof terrorism ndthe Third
Worldnarcotics
rade,
he
political
positions
and
academic,
or
'scientific',
authority
of
these self-annointed
Sendero
expertsacquired
an
even more
important
tatus
n
the
'post-ColdWar'
deological
machinery
f American
mperialism.
t is this fact which
gives
cause for
concern
that the US
Senderologists' ogma-unlike
that
of
Sendero-focuses
on
only
one 'theatre
f
operations'
nd one
type
of social
agent:
he Andean rural
countryside
nd
the
Quechua
or
Aymara
Indian'
peasant.
In
this
article,
we examine he
traditions
f
scholarly
epresentation
nd
the
construction
f
scientific
ruth
n
the workof
this
group
of
US
academic
specialists,
whom we shall refer to as
'Senderologists'.
irstwe look at the
scholarly
apparatus
pon
which
earlySenderologists
mounted heir
claims
that the PCP-SLconstitutesa 'mystery' r 'enigma'.We suggestthat this
image
of Senderohas
been
constructed
hrough
an
intentioned
pattern
of
bibliographic
lision
and
historical
alsification,
nd
through
he
mystifica-
tionof both
peasant
andThirdWorld
political
ationalities.
n
this
section
we
also
look at the
ways
in
which
the
'enigmatic'
tatus
of
Senderohas been
canonised
n the
iterature nd
usedto validate he
authority
f an
ntellectual
expertise
whichclaims o
decipher
he
mystery.
In the
following
wo
sections,
we look at how a series of related
assump-
tions
about
the natureof
peasantpolitical
culture,
ThirdWorld extremism'
and Maoist
dogma' hape
the
early
work
of
two US
Senderologists.
hese
assumptionsare based in received theoretical doctrine about: (1) the
processes
of
modernisation;
2)
the
essentialisedcultural
otherness'
of
peasants;
3)
the
parochial
nature
of
peasantpolitical
movements;
4)
the
irrationality
f
Thirdworld
politicalprocesses;
5)
the
uniformity
f
Maoist
thought;
and
(6)
the assimilation
of
Maoist
military
trategy
o
Western
historicist
llegories
bout he
struggle
etweenbarbarism nd
civilisation.
In
the
following
ectionswe examine he
hardening
f
the
peasant
model
n
later
texts
by
the same and other
authors.
We focus
in
particular
n
the
fit
between
senderological
models
and the
shifting
discursive
and
political
terrainof the
post
Cold War
era.
The
absorption
of
the
senderological
paradigm
nto thenew iteraturenterrorism ndnarcoterrorismeflectsnot
only
the
rising
dominance
f these new
fields
of
ideologicalproduction,
ut
the
easy
correspondence
between the
polarized
modernisationmodels
informingearly
senderology
and the 'new'
emphasis
on the
terroristic
irrationality
f
ThirdWorld
political
violence.
We conclude
with
some alternative
uggestions
or
how a more
productive
134
7/24/2019 D Poole nuevas cronicas del peru.pdf
4/60
THE NEW
CHRONICLERSOF PERU
vision
of
Sendero
might
be
approached.
We
suggest
hat
an
understanding
f
the last decade
of
political
violence in
Peru
requires
detailed
historical
and
regional
analysis
of
local and
state
power,
class structuresand the con-
structionof ethnic and culturaldifference. n particular, nyaccountof the
origins,
importance
and
future
of the PCP 'Sendero
Luminoso' must
necessarily
ake
nto
account
he
broad-based
rass-roots
ocial
movements,
popular
political
organisations
and
Leftist
parties
not
affiliated
with
or
supportive
of the PCP-SL's
actions.
By focusingnarrowly
n the PCP-SLas
the
sole
oppositional political
actor in
Peru,
US
Senderology
has both
privileged
and
exaggerated-and
therefore
endorsed-Sendero's claims to
represent
he Peruvian
peasant
and
working
lasses.
SCHOLARLY
METHODAND
FACTUAL
ENIGMA
I
believe that
if
you're
teachin'
history,
ill
it with
straight
up
facts
not
mystery-KRS
ONE3
The
authors
of
the earliest
work n
English
on SenderoLuminoso
are David
Scott Palmer and
Cynthia
McClintock.
Because the work of
these two
political
cientists
has,
n
manyways,
shaped
he
field of US
Senderology,
we
begin
our
discussion with a close
look at their
published
materials
and
scholarly
method.
In
this section we
will
be
particularly
nterested
in
examining
he
techniques
of
bibliographic eferencing
nd
citation
hrough
whichbothauthors ituate heirpublishedwork on Senderowithrespectto
the
broader ield
of
knowledge
aboutPeru
n
general
and SenderoLuminoso
in
particular.
As
the
groundwork
f
academic
method,
citation
and
biblio-
graphic referencing
provide
useful
entry points
for
understanding
how
'scholarly' uthority
as been
assembled
n
US
senderological
iscourse,
and
why
the
'mysterious'
r
'enigmatic'
scriptionplaced
on
Sendero
Luminoso
in
these
two
scholars'
arly
work
has come
to
be so
crucial
o the
enterprise
f
US
Senderology.
Cynthia
McClintock,
n associate
professor
n
the
Department
f
Political
Science at
George
WashingtonUniversity,
began
her work on Peru with
research in the early 1970s on the agricultural conomy and the co-
operatives
set
up
by
Peru's
military
government.4
Her work on
Sendero
draws
on economic
statistics,
on
survey questionnaires
conducted
on
agricultural
o-operatives
during
her
earlier
research,
nterviews
with Lima
intellectuals,
and 'informal
interviews
with
peasant
leaders
(not
from
Ayacucho)
during
various
periods
n
the
early
1980s'.5
David Scott
Palmer,
professor
of
Political
Science and
International
Relationsat Boston
University,
lso
began
his academic
areerwith
workon
the 1970s Peruvian
military overnment.
At the time
of his
original
Sendero
publications,
however,
Palmer
was Associate Dean
for
Programmes
and
Chairman f LatinAmericanandCaribbeanStudiesat theForeignService
Institute
of the
US
Department
f
State.His
analyses
of
Senderoare
based
n
part
on
the
time he
spent
n
Ayacucho
as a
Peace
Corp
volunteer
rom
1962
to 1964.6
During
these
years,
which
predate
Sendero's
consolidationas a
political
party,
Palmer
claims
o
have
met
many
ndividuals
who
were
aterto
become
senderistas,
ncluding
Abimael
Guzman.7
135
7/24/2019 D Poole nuevas cronicas del peru.pdf
5/60
BULLETINOF LATINAMERICANRESEARCH
Palmer
returned o
Ayacucho
10
years
later
to
carry
out
dissertation
researchon
the
effects
of
militarygovernmentpolicy
on
agricultural
o-
operatives
and
peasant
communities.8 e
returned
gainduring
he
period
1977-1979, as a visiting ecturer or the US Information erviceand the
State
Department's
chool of Area
Studies.
n
1980 he
published
a
critical
evaluation nd
study
of
military
eformism ntitledPeru: he
Authoritarian
Tradition
9
Both Palmer's nd
McClintock's
arly
workdraws
heavily
on the
modern-
isation
breakdownmodels
of
the US
political
scientists,
James
Davies and
Samuel
Huntington.10
hese
theoreticians
hifted he
emphasis
n
modern-
isation
heory
rom
economics
o
politics.
In
particular,hey predicted
hat
the
popular
desiresand mobilisations timulated
y
modernisation
n
Third
World
countries,
would lead
inevitably
o
disruption
of
orderlypolitical
process
n
thoseareas
where
culturally
r
sociallymarginal opulations-for
example,peasants-had
not
yet
made the
transition
rom
'traditional'
o
'moder'.
Huntington,
n
particular,
aw the
gap
between tradition
and
modernity-which
he
mapped
conveniently
nto that
supposedlyprevailing
between the
countryside
and the
city-as
the
primary
ource of
political
instability
n
ThirdWorldcountries. Becausehe
considered
Third
World,
and
particularly
atin
American,
ocieties
o be
constitutionallyncapable
f
reproducing
European
and US models of economicand
politicaldevelop-
ment,
Huntington,
whose influenceboth Palmerand McClintockacknow-
ledge,wenton toargue hatpolitical cientists houldabandon he Parsonian
assumptions
f both scientific
objectivity
nd
neutrality,
nd
engage
nstead
in
political ngineering.12
e
personally pplied
his
doctrine
as a member f
the National
Security
Council,
and as a
leading
architect
f
the
urbanisation
andforcedresettlement
rogrammes
n
Vietnam.'3
His
arguments
n
favour
of suchdrastic
ounterinsurgency
easureswere
bolstered,
n the one
hand,
by
his
belief
(or 'theory')
hatwhatThirdWorld
countries eededwas
a
large
dose
of authoritarian
institutionalisation',
nd,
on
the
other,
by
his
predic-
tion
that
both
modernity
and
political
nstitutionalisation ould
only
be
achievedonce
the
gap
between
city
and
countryside
ad
been
forcibly
limi-
nated.
This
ideologically
nformed onstruction
f the
opposition
betweenrural
and
urban,
raditional nd
modern,
constitutes
ne of the
principal egacies
of
Huntington's ounterinsurgency
heory
o
the
Senderologists'
nalyses
of
Peruvian
insurgency'
n
the 1980s. Like
Huntington,
he
Senderologists,
s
we
will
see,
attempt
o
explain
he
peasantry's
ole
in
Sendero's
insurgency'
by mythologising
heir
presumably
mbivalent
osition
n
what
Huntington
has
spatialised
and
engendered)
as
'the no-man's and of
change'
where
neither
tradition'
or
'modernity'
revails.14 hey
also
uncritically
ssume
his
hypotheses egarding
he
necessarily
fundamentalist'haracter
f Third
World 'rural
movements',
he 'tribal'characteristics f Latin American
political
cultures,
and
the
casual relation between universitiesand
the
'destabilising
ehaviour'
f
an
educatedThirdWorld
ntelligentsia.15
Another
subjectprivileged
y politicaldevelopment
heory
was the
Third
World
military,
who
Huntington
nd
other
heorists onsidered o be the last
hope
for
orderly
modernisation.'6
he reformist
military egime
which
ruled
136
7/24/2019 D Poole nuevas cronicas del peru.pdf
6/60
THE NEW
CHRONICLERSOF
PERU
Peru
from 1968 to 1975 underGeneralJuanVelascoAlvarado
provided
an
opportune
case
study
with which to
test
these
theories.
Both
Palmer
and
McClintock
began
their
careers,
as
we have
seen,
with
studies
of
Velasco's
militarygovernment.Theirlateranalysesof Sendero buildupon the same
dichotomised and
highly
authoritarianmodels of
political
modernisation
that
shaped
early
nterest
n
studyingmilitary
eform.
For
example,
Palmer's
emphasis
on
what he
sees as the
inevitability
of
Sendero's
(pre-modern)
political
fundamentalism s
clearly
informed
by
Huntington's
ominous
prediction
that,
when the
military
fails to
successfully
modernise and
institutionalise
opularpolitical
demands,
the
broadening
of
participation
ransforms he
society
into a
mass
praetorian ystem.
In
such
a
system
the
opportunity
o
create
political
institutionspasses from the military, he apostlesof order,to ... the
apostles
of
revolution.17
In
McClintock's
ase,
the
influenceof thisbrand
of
political
modernisation
(and
counterinsurgency)
heory
s seen most
clearly
n
her
approach
o
the
'politics'
of both
peasants
and Sendero Luminoso.For
McClintock,
as for
other
politicaldevelopment
heorists,
politics
are not
ways
of
doingthings
or
organisingpeople.
Rather,
politics
and
political
actions are taken
to
be
expressions
of
collective
mentalities
or
modes
of
feeling
that
necessarily
reflectsocietalvaluesand
beliefs.
This
epiphenomenal
pproach
o
explain-
ingpoliticalactivity gnoressuchquestionsas interestsandpowerin favour
of
whatMichael
Shafer
has
calleda
'de-odorised
politics'
purged
of
'the
cigar
smoke and stink
of
fear
that
accompany
the
vulgar
understanding
of
politics'.18
s we will
see,
it
is
by
virtueof
this
epiphenomenal
definitionof
'politics'that McClintock s
able,
on
the
one
hand,
to
ignore
the
role
of
competing
Peruvian
Leftist
political
and
peasant
organisations,
nd,
on
the
other,
to
extrapolategeneralities
about
'peasant
perceptions'
of
crisis
or
'peasant
attitudes'
owards
he
government
nto
proof
of
generalised
peasant
'political support'
for
Sendero
Luminoso. As we
will
suggest
later,
such
essentialising quations
between
peasant
values and
extremist
politics
have
ominous mplicationsor thetypesof counterinsurgencyoctrinenowbeing
applied
n
the Peruvian
highlands.
Such
equations
are
rendered even more
dubious
by
the
empirical
base
upon
which
both
these
authors validate
their
conclusions about
peasant
attitudes and
beliefs.
Although
both
rely
to
some
extent
on
the
textual
authority
onferred
by
the
fact that
they
once
lived
in
or visited
Peru,
their
specific
statements
bout
what
peasants
hink
rely
at
best on
survey
question-
naires
and,
at
worst,
on
impressionistic
bservations
and racist
assumptions
abouthow
'traditional
ndians'
easonand
think.
The bulk of
both
their
analyses,
however,
depends
on
neither
surveys
nor
observations,
but on
secondary
sources
and,
most
importantly,
on each
other.
McClintock's
influential 1984
World
Politics
article,
which all
subsequent
US
Senderology
ites,
refers
o Palmer's
1983
manuscript
s the
principal
ource
for the
PCP-SL's
politicalhistory.19
almer's1985
article n
turncites
McClintock's1983
publications.20
This
pattern
of
reciprocal
itation
s used to
create he
impression
hat
ittle
137
7/24/2019 D Poole nuevas cronicas del peru.pdf
7/60
BULLETIN
OF
LATINAMERICAN
RESEARCH
is
knownabout
Sendero
beyond
he work
of
these
wo
US
political
cientists.
This
image
of a
mysterious
errorist
group
s
reinforced
by
a
bibliography
which
systematically
lides
or
silences
both the
substantive
ontentand the
politicallysituatednatureof their Peruviansources.For information n
human
rights
abuses,
or
example,
Palmerrelies
not on the
easily
accessible
reports
of
organisations
uch
as
Americas
Watch
or
Amnesty
nternational,
buton
journalism
n
the
centre-right
eruvian
weekly,
Caretas,
nd
on Mario
Vargas
Llosa's
widely
discreditedand
avowedlypro-government
over-up
of
the
Uchuraccay
massacre.21McClintock
also cites
Vargas
Llosa's
Uchuraccay
article
in the
New York Times
Magazine
and-even
more
surprising-the
right-wing
mercenarymagazine
Soldier
of
Fortune,
for
estimates
of
Sendero's
trength
and
organisational
tructure.22
eithershe
nor Palmer
mentions
hat reliableand
sophisticated nalyses
of
Sendero's
ideology,goals
and
party
organisation
wereavailable t thetime.23
When Peruvian
social
scientific
publications
are cited
in
Palmer's
and
McClintock's
exts,
they
are
selectively
referenced
as sources
of
empirical
information,
ather
han
for the
analyses,
heories
or
political
perspectives
offered
by
their authors.
The
only
Peruvian
ocial
scientists
whom Palmer
cites
are referenced
as sources
of
statistical
nformation
r as
support
or
highly
generalised
bservations
boutthe
lack of
state-sponsored
evelop-
ment
n
Ayacucho.
The contents
of otherPeruvian
works
are
falsely
repre-
sentedas
references or
Palmer's
otally
allacious
ssertions
bout
Sendero's
'messianism'nd primitiveommunism'(seep. 158).Althoughhefootnotes
such
important
cholarship
s
Hector
Bejar's
book on
the
1965
guerrilla,
RauilGonzalez's
hronologies
nd
analyses
f
Sendero's ctivities
nd
politi-
cal-military trategies
n
the Peruvian
ournal
Quehacer,
nd
French
anthro-
pologist
Henri Favre's
mportant
analysis
of
Sendero's
class
and ethnic
origins,
n no case
does
he
attempt
o
incorporate
he facts
or
insights
con-
tained
in these
analyses
nto his own
portrait
of the PCP-SL.24
imilarly,
although
McClintock ites
work
by
the
British
political
cientist
ColinHard-
ing
and
the Peruvian
ociologist
Raiil
Gonzalez,
he
gives
no indication f
the
content
of
either
Harding's
r
Gonzilez's
analyses,
othof which
ocus
expli-
citlyandevensomewhat mphaticallyn SenderoLuminosonot as a 'peas-
ant
rebellion'
but
rather
as a
secular,
urban-based
political-military
organisation.25
Finally,
although
oth
Palmerand
McClintock
cknowledge
he
existence
of
position
papers
and
political
documents
written
by
the
PCP-SL,
not
once
do
they
either
analyse
or
refer
o the
actual
contentsof these
primary
ource
documents
on
party
ideology,
military strategy
and
political goals.26
Similarly, lthough
oth
authors
laim o
be
writing
bouta
'dogmatic
Maoist
party',
neither
refers
to
Mao's
own
writings
nor
attempts
o
distinguish
betweenthe
many
varieties
of
international
nd Peruvian
Maoism.
Rather
than
ooking
more
closely
at such
primary
ourcematerials r at studiesof
Peruvian
Maoism,
hey
nstead
rely
on
categorical
tatements
bout Maoist
dogma'
nd
on
secondary
nd/or
ournalistic
ccounts.27
Similarobfuscations
re
used to
support
both authors'
ategorical
tate-
ments
regarding
he differences
etweenSendero
and
other
Peruvian
Leftist
groups,
he
indecipherability
f the
peasantry
ndthe
undocumented
ature
138
7/24/2019 D Poole nuevas cronicas del peru.pdf
8/60
THENEW
CHRONICLERS
OF
PERU
of
Ayacuchano
social
reality.
For
example,
McClintock's
analysis
of
the
Peruvian
uerrillas
n the
1960s andthe Peruvian
peasant
movement-out
of
whichshe claimsSendero
emerges
and
of
which she
claims
t
forms a
part-
relies on general secondarysources and edited volumesby US political
scientists.
She
does not cite
any
of the
available
analyses
of the
Peruvian
guerrilla;
nor
does she
use
any
of
the
multitude
of
available
political
and
statisticaldocuments
put
together
by
the
independentopposition
peasant
organisation,
he
Confederaci6n
Campesina
del
Peru
(CCP).28
hese docu-
ments
contain
explicit
statements
regarding
the
CCP's
political
and
ideological
rejection
of
Sendero's tactics
and document the
adversarial
marginality
f
Sendero
to the
popular
peasant
social movement
in
Peru.
Finally, missing
from both her
and Palmer's
analyses
are
substantive
references
to
any
of the
theses,
field
reports,
statistical
studies,peasant
community
surveys,
or intellectualand
politicaljournals
produced
at the
University
of
Huamanga
nd
elsewhere
n
Peru,
during
he
1960s,
1970s and
early
1980s.29
McCLINTOCK'S EASANT
REBELLION
No tenemos
retaguardia
l
comienzo
o
la
tendremos
pequeha,
debil,
frdgily
variable-Abimael
Guzmain
(1980)30
When
the
subject
is a
political
and
militaryorganisation
as
important
as
SenderoLuminoso,such misrepresentationsf sourcesas those outlined
above
have
important
consequences
which
go beyond
the
domain of
scholarlyaccuracy
and
ethics.
For
example,
McClintock's ailure o
consult
or
to
cite
major,
readily
available
documents
in
which
the
CCP,
CNA
(National
Agrarian
Confederation)
nd other
regional
and national
peasant
organisations
enounce
Sendero's uthoritarian
nd
terrorist
olitics,
relates
directly
o
her
claims o mountan
authoritative
heory
of
Sendero's ole
and
centrality
n
the Peruvian
peasant
movement. t is this
stated ntentionof
the
author
which
transformsher
bibliographic
omissions'
nto overt
political
statements
about what
she believes
to be the
origins
and
direction of
Peruvianpeasant politics, and, equally important,her opinions about
Peruvian
peasants',
cholars'
and
politicians'
ability
to
speak
for their
own
political
and
social
reality.
McClintock's
objective
of
representing
Sendero as a
rural
peasant
rebellion
shapes
not
only
her
bibliographic
hoices,
but
also the manner
and
order
in
which
she
presents
the
facts about
Sendero.
McClintock's
irst
publishedanalyses
of
Sendero
appear
n
September
1983.31We will
focus
here,
however,
on
hermore
ambitious
rticle
published
n
1984 in
the
journal
World
Politics,
because it
is
this article
which
is most
frequently
cited
by
subsequent
Senderologists
and which
has,
therefore,
most
influenced the
field of US
Senderology.32
n this
article,
McClintock
proposes
to 'examine
the
origins
of
a
major
rural
revolutionary
movement,
Sendero
Luminoso',
o
evaluate he
nature
of
its
'considerable
peasant
support
n
Peru's
southern
highlands',
nd 'to
shed new
light
on ...
the
prevailing
heories
of
peasant
revolution'
(McClintock,
1984:
49).
In
the
following
analysis
of the
World
Politics
article,
we
suggest
hat
the
139
7/24/2019 D Poole nuevas cronicas del peru.pdf
9/60
BULLETINOF LATIN
AMERICANRESEARCH
author ails o
examine
arefully
what
might
be meant
by
the term
support'
n
the Peruvian ase and that she instead
assumes
he de
facto
existenceof
a
generalised
nd
historically
on-specific
peasantsupport
network.33n the
political developmentmodel which she employs,this de facto support
network
s
assumedas
necessary
or
Sendero
o have
emerged
at all
since
politics
are taken
to be an
epiphenomenal
manifestation
f
societal
values
and
'mentalities'
(see
p.
137).
This
a
priori
assumption
s
necessary
for
McClintock
o mould Sendero's
extremist
political-military
rganisation
into
a
suitable case
with
which
to intervene
n
'various
heoreticalcon-
troversies
n
the
scholarship
on
peasant
revolution'
(ibid.,
p.
48).
These
controversies
re:
(1)
the
importance
f
subsistence rises
n
the
determina-
tionof
peasant
ebellion;
2)
'the
ype
of
agrarian
tructuremost
conducive
o
[peasant]evolutionary ctivity';3)
the
way
in
which
government grarian
policies shape peasant political perceptions;
and
(4)
'geopolitics'
ibid.,
p.
49).
These
questions
arise
out of
the
literature n
comparative easant
revolutions
by
Barrington
Moore,
Eric
Wolf,
James
Scott,
Theda
Skocpol
and
Jeffery
Paige.34
ather
han
considering
he
specific
political
tructuring
and
raison
d'tre
of the
PCP-SL
as
a
political-militaryorganisation,
McClintock
xplicitly
tructures er
questions
o
address
his literature
n
comparative
easant
and
agrarian
ebellions
nd revolutions.
he PCP-SL's
relevance
o this
iterature,
nd
therefore
ts statusas
a
'peasant
ebellion',
s
thereby
presented
as
an a
priori
assumption
ather han as a historical
or
sociologicalproblemwhichmustbefirstproven,and then addressed.
McClintock
egins
her
1984 articlewitha schematic ccount
of
the
origins
of
the
PCP-SL.Shefirst ells
the reader hat he
University
f
Huamanga
was
'the
professional
ome
of
various
xtremely
adical
roups
until
1978'
(ibid.,
pp.
50-51)
and
thatthere
was considerableactionalism.
he next
mentions
that the
PCP-SLwas
'founded
n
1968
[sic]
by
Abimael
Guzman',
who
she
describes
imply
as
a
'philosophy
rofessor'
rom
Arequipa.
She
then abels
Sendero's
ideology
and
political position
as
'Gang-of-Four
Maoist',
'classically
Maoist',
'unusually
ectarian'
and as
'stridently
riticalof the
currentSoviet
and Chinese
governments,
s well as of
[the
PeruvianLeftist
coalition]IzquierdaUnida'(ibid.,p.
51).35
She claimstheyare 'extremely
taciturn
bout
[their]
trategies
nd
programs'
ndthendismisses
he
content
of
their
published
documents
as
'very
slim' and
'dealingprimarily
with
guerrilla
warfare'
(ibid.,
p.
51).
She
gives
no
summary
f
the
actual
ontent
of
these
documents;
nor
does she
explain
why
documents
primarily
about
guerrilla
warfare hould
be
considered rrelevant
o
analysis
of
what
she
herself
describes as
a
'guerrilla
movement'.
Instead,
she dismisses the
question
by typologising
endero's
ideology'
s
'classically
Maoist',
phrase
which he assumes
ncorrectly
o mean hat
revolution
s
to be achieved
by
a
prolongedpopular
war
that
will
first
gather upport
n
the
countryside
nd
then
inally
encircle hecities'
(ibid.,
p.
51,
emphasis
urs).
McClintock
concludes
her overview
of Sendero's
party
history by
insinuating
cultural
r
ideological
ontinuity
etweenAndean
peasants
nd
Sendero's
Maoism.
Sendero',
he claims
at the
close
of
her
paragraph
bout
the
party's
rigins,
has
ncorporated
ymbols
rom
he Incan
nsurrectionary
tradition
nto
its
posture'
(ibid.,
p.
51).
She
opens
the next
paragraph
y
140
7/24/2019 D Poole nuevas cronicas del peru.pdf
10/60
THE NEW
CHRONICLERS
OF
PERU
stating imply
hat The
movement
grew
gradually'.
his
'growth',
he
claims,
occurred at
meetings
held
in
the
home of
the
'charismatic
Guzman'
and
through
an
obscure
process
in
which
'students rom
peasant
families
...
actually ived for long periods n Indiancommunities .. learned he Indian
language
..
married nto the
communities-and
preached
politics'
(ibid.,
p.
50).
McClintock's our
short
paragraphs
n
Sendero's
party history'
are not
only
riddledwith
error,
hey
are
intentionally
tructured o
insinuatea set
of
theoretical
assumptions
around which
McClintock will
structure the
remainder f her
article.These
suppositions
re:
(1)
the notion
that he
PCP-
SL
spontaneously
merged
out of a
factionalistradicalism
ndemic to the
University
of
Huamanga;
2)
the notion
that
peasant
social
movements
require organic
cultural
(or ethnic)
links
between their
leaders,
their
repertoire
of
motivating ymbols,
and their
followers;
(3)
the notion
that
peasant
political
culture
is irrational
and
pre-modern
(or
even
pre-
Columbian)
ecauseof
its isolation rom
national
political
discourse;
4)
the
assumption
hat
peasantpolitical
culture s
regionally
uniform;
and
(5)
the
idea that
Sendero's
Maoist
doctrine
preaches
an
'encircling'
f the
citiesanda
consequent polarisation
of
Peru's urban
and rural
populations.
Let us
examine
he factual
bases of
these
suppositions
one-by-one.
First,
the PCP
'Sendero
Luminoso'
was not
one of
'various
extremely
radical
groups'
at
the
University
of
Huamanga,
much
less the creation
of a
philosophyprofessor. twas and s apoliticalpartyandmilitary rganisation
which is known
and
identified
by
its
contested and far from
hegemonic
position
within
the Peruvian
eft.
In
1964,
the Peruvian
Communist
Party
split
nto the Partido
Comunista
Peruano-'Unidad'
(PCP-U)
and the
Partido
Comunista del
Peru 'Bandera
Roja'
(PCP-BR).
This
split
reflected the
division
n
the
international
ommunistmovementbetween
he Soviet
Union
and China.
At that time
Abimael
Guzmain
was a
militantof
the
Peruvian
Communist
Party
and
sided with
the
pro-Chinese
PCP-BR.
One
year
later,
the
youth
branchof
Bandera
Roja
split
for
internal
political
differences nto
the Partido
Comunista
del Peru
'Patria
Roja'
(PC
del
P-PR).
Guzman
remainedas theleaderof PCP-BR'sSpecialWorkCommission nchargeof
military
ffairs
(Comision
de
Trabajo
Especial).
At the
height
of
the
Cultural
Revolution,
Guzman
ravelled o
Chinato
attenda
cadre school.
Upon
his
return o
Ayacucho,
he led
a faction
within
the PCP-BR
('Fracci6n
Roja').
This
faction
was
committedto
armed
insurrection.
n
1969
the
political
positionsput
forward
by
Guzman's
action
were defeated
n
the
congress
of
the
peasant
ederation
ontrolled
by
PCP-BR,
he
Federacion
Departmental
de
Campesinosy
Comunidadesde
Ancash
(FEDCCA),
as well
as
in
the
University
of
Huamanga
tudent
front,
the
Frente
Estudiantil
Revolucion-
ario
(FER).
In
these
circumstances,
aving
decided to
privilege
clandestine
organisation
nd armed
struggle,
Guzman'sFracci6n
Roja
consolidated n
1970 to
become the
PCP
'Sendero
Luminoso'.
At the
time
McClintockwrote
her
early
articles,
he
general
outlinesof
this
party
genealogy
was
public
knowledge
n
Peruvian
political
and
intellectual
circles,
and was
published
in
numerous
Peruvian
party
newspapers,
magazines
and
pamphlets.36
n
fact,
the
name Sendero
Luminoso'
omes off
141
7/24/2019 D Poole nuevas cronicas del peru.pdf
11/60
BULLETINOF
LATINAMERICAN
RESEARCH
the masthead f
a
newspaper
ublishedby
the factionof
Ayacucho's
Frente
EstudiantilRevolucionario
(FER)
controlled
by
Guzman's
Fracci6n
Roja'.
It
is,
perhaps,
nderstandablehat
McClintock id not
know
or
didnot
tell
her readers he completedetailsof thiscomplexpartyhistory. t is equally
comprehensible
hat she wouldnot have had
ready
access
to,
or
wouldnot
choose
to
cite,
all of
the
early
documents
and
polemicssurrounding
en-
dero's
early
party
history.
What s not
acceptable,
however,
s to
present
a
politically
motivated rmed
plinter roup
of
the
Peruvian
Communist
arty
as
an
isolated
or
spontaneously enerated
movement'
hich
prang p
in the
radical incubatorof the
University
of
Huamanga
or in the
home of a
charismatic
hilosophyprofessor.
We
can
begin
o
understand
why
McClintock
might
havechosen o
repre-
sent Sendero
n
such
a
fashion
by examining
second
theoretical
premise
embedded
n
her account
of
Sendero:
he
concept
of
a
political
or
social
'movement'.
n her
1984
text
she
employs
he
term
peasant
movement'
nter-
changeably
with
he terms
peasant
evolt'and
peasant
ebellion' o
describe
Sendero
Luminoso
(pp.
48-50,
passim).
Moreover,
lthough
he claims hat
SenderoLuminoso s
'not
Peru's irstradical
peasant
movement'
(p. 77),
she
gives
no
examples
of whatshe considers o
have
been the
circumstances,
e-
mandsor nature
of
previous
peasant
movements
n
Peru,
nor
does
she men-
tion
the
existence of a broad
peasant
movement
contemporary
with
and
opposed
o
Sendero.
nstead,
Sendero's
peasant
movement's defined
negat-
ivelyby oppositionto the 'guerrillamovement'whichprecededit in the
1960s.
According
o
McClintock,
his
earlier
guerrilla
movementdiffered
from Sendero's
peasant
revolt'
on
several counts. Unlike
Sendero,
she
claims,
Peru's
evolutionary
ctivists
of
the
early
1960s were
..
of middle-
to
upper-class
rigins
and
rom he
cities'
(pp. 77-78).
They
werenot 'able o
gain
the
peasants'
rust or to
organise
effectivemovements'
(p. 78).
They
were,
she
continues,
almost
otally
unsuccessful
n
recruiting ighlands
sic)
peasants
o their
cause.
They
did
not
prepare
or a
struggle.
Nor
did
they
establisha
political
base...
In
particular,heyoverlooked
he
differences etween
the Cuban ierramaestra nd
the
Peruvian
ighlands
p. 78).
Moreover,
she
continues,
they
were
'roving, undisguised,unprotected
guerrilla
ands'
who,
when
hey
moved nto
the
lowland
areas,
were
quickly
detected,
as their
physical ppearance
was
radically
ifferent
rom
hatof the
jungle
peoples'
p. 78).
As
an
example
of
the alienatedurban
revolutionary
leader,
he cites the case of
Hugo
Blanco.
In
point
of
fact,
Hugo
Blanco,
who
speaks
luent
Quechua,
s a
university-
trained
agronomist
rom
the
rural
agricultural
istrict
apital
of
Huanoquite
in
the
Cusqueiioprovince
of Paruro.
n
the
early
1960s he moved to the
lowland
Cusqueiiovalley
of La Convenci6nwhere he became a share-
cropper
(aparcero)
working
along
with the
other
peasant
sharecroppers
and
tenant farmers
o build the
Federaci6nProvincialde
Campesinos
de La
Convencion Lares.He later
became
he
secretary eneral
f this
ederation,
and
it
was
in this
capacity
hat he led
the
peasants'
ive-year
struggle
o
recover heir
and.It
was
only
at the end of this
five-year
period
hat
Blanco
142
7/24/2019 D Poole nuevas cronicas del peru.pdf
12/60
THE NEW CHRONICLERSOF PERU
and the
peasant
organisation
he headed
created
an
armed self-defence
committee
(Comite
de
Auto Defensa
Campesina).
As McClintockherself
acknowledgesp. 78)
Blanco,
who
was a
Trotskyist
militant,
was
ideologic-
ally
opposed
to
launching
guerrilla
warfarewithout
having
first built
up
a
social base
and
revolutionary
arty.
t is
precisely
because
of his ruralback-
ground,
luency
n
Quechua
and
experience
working
with
the
peasant
edera-
tion
in
La Convencion
hat
Blanco
became,
andhas
remained,
very
popular
political igure
among
peasants
n the
southernPeruvian
highlands
f
Cusco,
Apurfmac
nd
Ayacucho.
Clearly
McClintock-who cites no literaturewhatsoever
o
support
her
description
of
Blanco-chose
the
wrong example
o
prove
her
thesis
about
the alienatedstatus
and non-rural
origins
of the
1960s
guerrilla
eaders.37
Had she chosenanyof a numberof otherguerrillaeaders rom thisperiod,
however,
he
would have been
equallywrong.38
here s an extensive
biblio-
graphy
on the 1960s Peruvian
guerrilla
which containsthis information.39
Nevertheless,
she neither cites this
literature,
presents
historical
evidence
aboutthe 1960s
guerrilla,
or
considers
he fact thatSendero's
own
evalua-
tion of the 1960s
guerrilla
ocuses
on
totally
different
spects
of
ideology
and
military
strategy.40
nstead,
McClintock
presents
a
superficial
and
totally
undocumented
eading
of
the
1960s
guerrilla xperience
n
order o
support
her
hypothesis
hat the 1960s movementdiffered
qualitatively
rom that of
Sendero
because ts
leadersdid not share
organic
ultural nd
classties to
the
peasantryorwhomthey fought.
What
then is the
positive
evidence
she
presents
to
prove
that
Sendero-
whose
principal
deologue
and
military
eader
is a
middle-class,
Spanish-
speaking,
Kantian
philosopher
rom
Arequipa-does
have a more
organic
relationship
to
the
peasantry?
Here we come to McClintock's third
supposition-the
necessarily
unmediated or
organic
nature of
peasant
political
culture.
As
we have
seen,
in
her
introduction o Sendero's
political
history,
she insinuates hat the PCP-SL shares an
ideological
or
'symbolic'
universe
with
the
peasantry,
nd that
they
invoke
this universe
hrough
he
use of 'Incan
[sic]
nsurrectionary ymbols'.
She does not
give
her readers
examples
of these
symbols.
Nor does she ventureto
explain
why
peasants
might
be
spurred
to insurrection
by
some
vague
set
of
pre-Columbian
symbols
with little or no
specificrelationship
o
their
daily
ives.Insteadshe
simply
footnotes the PCP-SL
document,
'Develop
Guerrilla Warfare'
(hereafter
referred to as
'Desarrollemos'),
hereby implying
that such
symbols
are contained
n
thatdocument
(p.
51,
fn
9).
This, however,
is not the case.
'Desarrollemos' s Sendero's irst
major
public
assessmentof the successanddirection
of
its
military ampaign.
n
this
document,
hey
claim
responsibility
or over 2900 armedactions
between
1980 and 1982. Theylistthelocationand natureof theseactions-well over
half of which
were
in
urban ocations-in
detail
and
clearly
state that these
actions are
part
of
the initial
stage
of a
long-termmilitary
trategy
o over-
throw
he 'old order'.
They
assess
the
response
of the
government
nd other
'reactionary
orces'
n
Peruvian
ociety
to their nitial
stage.They
offer
their
interpretation
f
the
political
ituation,
he economiccrisisand the Belaiinde
government.
Nowhere
does the document
contain the
slightest
allusion to
143
7/24/2019 D Poole nuevas cronicas del peru.pdf
13/60
BULLETINOF
LATINAMERICANRESEARCH
'Incan
nsurrectionaryymbols'.
Nowhere does
it-or
any
other Sendero
party
document-privilege
ethnic,
racial or
cultural actors
as
elements
shaping
he historical
ision,
politicalphilosophy
nd
military trategy
f the
PCP-SenderoLuminoso.41
In
fact,
n
those
documentswherePCP-SL
pokespersons
nd
eaders
do
mention 'Andean culture'
hey
disparage
uch
'folklore'
as 'nacionalismo
mdgico-quejumbroso'
'magical-whining
ationalism')
and
as archaic
survivals
whichmust
be
eliminated
n
the construction f thePCP-SL'sNew
Democracy'.42
n
response
to an
interviewer's
ueryregarding
he
'funda-
mentalist endencies'
f SenderoLuminoso
nd
he rolethat
he
partyassigns
to
religion
n
Peruvian
ociety,
LuisArce
Borjaresponded
hat
thePC
does
not
propose
to
go
back to
an
Inca
regime
or
to
any
other
rrationalities....
[R]eligion ndthe PC are two opponents'.ForArce, as for otherSendero
spokespersons,
he
'magic
of
stars,
of
animals,
of
the
Sun and the soul'
constitute a
cultural elief
n
magic
which]
ontinues
o
have nfluenceover
the most
backward
nhabitants
f
Peru....
[T]his Andean]
ultural
radition
has
absolutely othing
o do
with
the warandthe
revolutionarytruggle'.43
Even a
summary
eview
of the
historical
iterature n
peasantpolitical
and
socialmovements
n
the PeruvianAndes wouldshow
that
the 'insurrection-
ary'
raditions
nd
symbols
whichMcClintockwishes
o attributeo
Sendero,
form
part
of a much
more
complex
political
culture
of
resistance/rebellion
forged
n
response
o and as
part
of
the broader
class,
ethnicand nationalist
discourses ndexperiences f colonialandrepublican eru.44 hiscultures
the
product
of
over
fourcenturies
f
exchange
f ideasbetween
he Andean
and
the
European
worlds.The
single
most
important
ounding
basis
of
this
hybridpolitical
culture
upon
which
Sendero
builds is
an
insurrectionary
tradition
of rebellionand bloodshed nherited
rom the
bourgeois
revolu-
tionary
and nationalist raditions f the
Frenchrevolution.45 nother s the
Christian,
nd later
socialistand
anarchist,
radition
of
messianic
utopian
thought.46
McClintock's
unsupported
assumption
that Sendero's
symbols
must
necessarily
be
'Incan'
n
nature,
negates
the PCP-SL's
place
within
this
European-and
now international-traditionof
revolutionary
utopian
discourse.
t
also,
however,
reflects
her
ignorance
aboutthe
ways
in which
both
political
discourse
and
political
symbols
are
constructed,
used and
interpeted
n
twentieth-century
eru. 'Inca'
ymbols
n
Peru
are
no
longer
simple
tokens
of a natural
Indian'
culture,
but are rather
mediated
by
Peruvians'
nd
Peruvian
easants'
xperiences
withthe
indigenista
hetoric
and
conography mployed
by nearly very
wentieth-centuryolitical
party
and
eader.
The condor
rom he
pre-Inca
tate
centred
n
Chavin
de Huantar
is
included
n APRA's
party
emblem.
PresidentBelauinde
onned
ponchos
andother ndigenous ostumesonhistravels hroughheprovinces
of Peru.
The
slogan
of
General
Juan
Velasco Alvarado
was
the
Quechua
phrase,
'kausachum
ampesinuruna'
'long
live
the
peasants'),
and the hat of the
eighteenth-century
ndian
rebel
leader
Tupac
Amaru was
the
pervasive
symbol
of the
agrarian
eform
whichMcClintock
erself
tudied.
The names
of the
1960s
guerrilla
ronts
werePachacutec
(Central
ierra),
Tupac
Amaru
(front
n
La
Convenci6n),
llariq
Chaska
(command
ase
in
La
Convencion)
144
7/24/2019 D Poole nuevas cronicas del peru.pdf
14/60
THE NEW
CHRONICLERS
OF
PERU
and Manco Inca
(northern
ierra).
Limeiio
activist
ntellectuals
requently
choose such
quechuizedpseudonyms
as SilvestreCondorunaand
Americo
Pumaruna.The
US
DEA
and Peruvian
military
anti-drugoperation
was
called
'Operacion
Condor'and the US-trained
special
counter-insurgency
forces
in
Peru
are
called 'Sinchis'and
'LlapanAtiqs'.47
ndeed,
given
the
prominence
and
importance
of
Andean,
Indian,
Quechua
and
Inca
symbols
in
Peruviannationalist
discourse,
t
is
singularlynoteworthy
hat Sendero
uses
none
of the usual
repertoire
of 'Incan
ymbols',
hatAbimael
Guzman
has chosen the
names
of
Spanish
conquistadores
or
his noms de
guerre
(Alvaro
and
Gonzalo),
and
that Guzmanreads
excerpts
from the texts of
Shakespeare (Macbeth,
Julius
Caesar)
and
Washington
Irving
in
his
'charismatic'
ncitements
o
armed
struggle.48
As
a
provincial,
Peruvian
political-militaryorganisation,
he
PCP-SL
undoubtedly
forms a
part
of
and
builds
upon
aspects
of
both Peruvian
national
political
culture-including
its 'Incan
symbols'-and
the subset
of
thatculturewhichwe
might
hinkof
as Andean
peasantpolitical
culture.This
commonality
s
determined
by
the fact that these
Andean 'traditions' nd
peasant political
cultureshave been
shaped by
the same
set
of
forces
that
have
shaped
the
thinking
of
PCP-SL militantsand
leaders. These 'forces'
include the broader
political
traditionsand
discourses
of
Marxistand
non-
Marxist
political parties,
NGOs and
international
development
projects,
progressive
church
organisations,
peasant
federations,
mining
unions,
indigenistculturalmovements and regionalistmovements.Peasantsare
moved to act
politically-and
to lend
political
support'-by
their
reasoned
reflection
on their
prior
historical and
personal
experiences
with
such
organisations
nd
by
their
understandings
f what
economic and
political
benefitssuch
organisations
s SenderoLuminosohave to
offer them.
They
are
not
spurred
to action
by vague
(or,
in
this
case,
non-existent)
Incan
symbols
or
by
charismatic
niversityprofessors.
In
earlier work,
McClintock
describes
peasant
participation
in
government-managed
o-operatives
and
gives
credence to
the extent and
importance
of
organisedpeasant political
activity
n
the
form
of
national
strikes,peasantfederationsandorganisingby the CCPand CNA.49 n her
1984
article,
by
comparison,
McClintock
systematically
excludes all
reference o the existenceof
such
peasantpoliticalexperience,
as
well as all
reference to
popular
opposition politics
in
Ayacucho
not
associated
with
Sendero Luminoso. She claims
that Sendero has
privileged
ties to the
peasantry
because
they
sent
party
members
o work
n
the
countryside
n
the
1970s
(p.
51).
Yet she fails to
mention that this was
common
practice
for
many
eftist
parties
n
Peru
throughout
he
1970s.
Of
these,
the PCP-SLwas
probably
the
group
with
the
least
presence
in
the
countryside
outside of
Ayacucho.50Moreover, udgingby
the
topics
of
its
fliers and
publications
during
the
early
1970s,
even
in
Ayacucho,
it
was the
party
with the least
active nterest
n
agrarian
ssues and the
peasant
cause.5'
Diverging
harply
rom
her own
past
work
on
the
co-operatives
ormed
by
the
Velasco
government,
McClintockfurther
simplifies
the
political
and
ethnic
setting
n which
Sendero
emergedby
claiming
hat
the
Velasco
regime
failed
to
establishnew
political
nstitutions
n
the
countryside'
p.
79),
and
145
7/24/2019 D Poole nuevas cronicas del peru.pdf
15/60
BULLETINOFLATINAMERICANRESEARCH
that no
significant
ew encroachment n the
lives
of the
highlands
easantry
were
apparentduring
he
1970s
(p. 76).52
Repeatedly hroughout
he text
(p.
49,
passim)
she statesthat
Ayacucho-and
therefore
ts
peasants-were
isolated from the capitalistmarket and had very little experiencewith
national
ociety.
She even
goes
so far as to claim hat
Ayacucho
s the
only
one of the
five
southern
[Peruvian]
highlandsdepartments
hat is
in-
accessible,
without
a mainroad rom
he coast'
(p.
76).53
In
fact,
Ayacucho
s
the
department
with the
highestmigration
ate to Limaand
migrants
here
maintain
active
ties with their
relatives
n
Ayacucho's
isolated'
peasant
communities.54
Moreover,
the
road to
Cusco
and
Apurimac
rom
Lima
passes
throughAyacucho
and
Ayacucho
has
an
airport
with
flights
from
LimaandCusco
entering
everal imes
weekly.
Why
does
McClintock ind t
necessary
o
falsify
Peruvian
eography
nd
history
in
this manner?
Why
does she
systematically
lide
the
history
of
political
and social movements
in
the Peruvian
highlands
n
order to
represent
Sendero
as a 'rural
peasant
movement'?
The answersto these
questions
lie,
in
part,
in
the fourth
supposition
nforming
McClintock's
analysis.
This
supposition,
which s drawn
directly
rom
James
Scott'smuch
disputed
model
of
peasant
rebellion,
posits
that he PCP-SL's
olitically
nd
partisan
motivated rmed
truggle riginates
n,
and s an
organic
xpression
of,
the
economicneeds of 'the
peasantry'.
McClintock
begins
her
analysis
of
the 'subsistence' auses of
Sendero
Luminoso'speasant ebellion' yconvincingly ertifying,withstatistics,he
severeeconomic
crisis
afflicting
eruand
especially
hePeruvian
ierra n
the
late 1970s and
early
1980s. She also
correctly
documents nd
describes he
failures
f
Velasco's
agrarian
eform
programme.
er
problems
rise,
on the
one
hand,
in
her
assumptions
that the economic crisis
necessarily
corresponded
o a 'subsistence
risis',and,
on
the
other,
n the
ways
n
which
she
attempts
to
translate
he
alleged
economic and
biological
crisis into
peasant upport
or Sendero.
An
example
of thissomewhat onvoluted
nterpretive rocess
s heruse
of
surveys
o measure
peasantpolitical
support
or
Sendero.As a measureof
'thepeasants'ubjective xperience f economiccrisisshe citestheresultsof
a
surveyquestion
she
asked
in
1980 to 25
peasants
n
'Varya', peasant
community
ssociated
witha
government
ormed
co-operative
nterprise
r
SAIS
(Sociedad
Agricola
de Inter6s
Social)
n
Huancavelica. he resultsof
this
survey,
he
reports,
were hat 84
per
cent
of
25
respondents
aid
n
1980
that
he
community's rogress
had
been bad'
(ibid.).
She then
umps
o
1984
at whichtime
Varya
was
'alleged
o
be a
pro-Senderistaommunity'
ibid.).
The
only
proof
she offers
of
the
Varya
peasants' upport
or Sendero
s
the
fact that the
village
had
been
occupied by
the Peruvianarmed
forces.55
Acceptingarmyallegations
f
the
village's
terrorist'
inks,
McClintock hen
contrasts he
'possible
pro-Senderistaympathies'
nd
pessimistic
ttitudes
of
Varya
with
the 'more
positive
views
and
non-Senderistanclinations' f a
coastal
co-operative
and
a
'prosperous
central
highlands
peasant
com-
munity'
where she asked the same
questions
(ibid.).
These
peasants,
she
claims,
were better
off
after the
agrarian
eform
and,
as a
result,
wereno
longer
concerned
with
subsistence,
ut with
secondary-school
ducation
or
146
7/24/2019 D Poole nuevas cronicas del peru.pdf
16/60
THE
NEW
CHRONICLERS
OF
PERU
their children'
(p. 66).
Her conclusions are that
peasants
with
subsistence
crises and 'bad' economic conditions
are
prone
to look to Sendero as
a
solutionto their
problems.
Of
these
poor peasants,
hose
in
Ayacucho
were
the
poorest
andmoreisolated.
They
weretherefore,
presumably,
hose most
apt
to turn o
the PCP-SL
(pp.
59-62).
In
this
'analysis'
McClintock
has
carefully
crafted her
depiction
of
the
political
space
withinwhich
Sendero
operates.
The fact that
'peasants
were
perceiving
a crisis'
(p. 62)
relies on McClintock's omission
of crucial
information
regarding
he
quite
different
political
and
regional
contexts-
and therefore
the
quite
different
peasantries-existing
in
a Huancavelica
SAIS
formed
during
a
government-sponsored
grarian
eform
and
in
the
impoverished
and
(by
her own
characterisation)
solated
provinces
of
the
department Ayacucho)which,in McClintock'sown words,was 'the least
benefited
agrarian
one'
(1984:
66)
in
Peru's
1969
agrarian
eform.56
These
radically
different
experiences
with the
agrarian
reform,
among
other
things,
make
the
political
and economic factors
informing
a
Varya
peasant'sunderstanding
f what such
(inherentlyvague)
words as
'bad',
'crisis'
and
'progress'
mean
quite
distinct rom
the
interpretations laced
on
suchwords
by,
for
example,
an
Ayacuchano
or
Apurimeiiopeasant.
ndeed,
in
McClintock's1982 article
on
agrarian olitics
n
Peru,
she cites the same
survey
n
a
very
different
way.
In
this earlier
publication,
he tells us that
'84
per
cent of the
Varyarespondents
aid
that,
since the
inauguration
f
the
SAIS,Varya'sprogresshad been"bad".'57learly,ntheoriginal urvey, he
peasants
were not asked about 'crisis'
n
general,
but rather about their
perceptions
of a
poorly managed,government-owned
AIS and its
corrupt
government-appointed
dministrators.
y
the late
1970s,
the
peasants
hem-
selves had
proposed
to
reorganise
reestructurar)
he
SAIS
under
their own
political
and
managerial
initiative.58Similar
manipulations
occur
in
McClintock's
failure either to mention Velasco's
sweeping
educational
reformsas
a context
affecting
he 'better-off
co-operativepeasants'
nterest
in
educationover
subsistence,
or to mention he fact thatthe
largestpopular
socialmovement
n
defence
of
free educationoccurred
n
Ayacucho
n
1969.
Deprived nthiswayof the social andpoliticalcontext nwhichsurveyswere
conducted,
such statements
by peasantsclearlyprovide
no
evidence
what-
soever
of a
causal
ink
between
a
worsening
conomic
situationand
peasant
support
or
Sendero.59
We do
not
wish
to
deny
the factthatSenderodid and
does
havethe
support
of certain ectorsof the Andean
peasantry
n
Peru.This s
particularly
rue
of
Ayacucho,
where Sendero's
community
of
political sympathisers
and
militantss
greatly xpandedby
networks f
kinship,
compadrazgo
nd
paisa-
naje,
as
well as
by
the
undeniably
authoritarian nd
violent
persuasion
methods
through
which
they
'influence'both
voting
behaviour and
gain
'support'.60
he nature of the
'support'
offered to Sendero
by differently
situated ctors
within
hesenetworks
s, however,
neitheruniformnor
consist-
ently political'.
This s
even more trueof the
'support'
nd
sympathy'
ffered
to Sendero
by peasants
n
different
provinces
of
Ayacucho
and
in
different
regions
of Peru.
These
peasants'perceptions
of
Sendero's
military
nd
politi-
cal
agenda
areconditioned
by
the
quitespecific
ocaland
regional xperiences
147
7/24/2019 D Poole nuevas cronicas del peru.pdf
17/60
BULLETIN
OFLATIN
AMERICAN
RESEARCH
with,
and
knowledges
f,
the
Peruvian
tate,
national
politicalparties
and
the
capitalist
economy.
McClintock's
nalysissystematically losses
both the
complexity
f these
regionally pecific
Andean
peasantpolitical
ultures,
nd
theimportant enerational ifferencesbetweenSendero's outhful uppor-
ters
and the
peasantry'
s
a whole.61
By
eliding
he
non-peasant
that
s,
'non-organic')
rigins
and
background
of
many
of
Sendero's
militants nd
eaders,
by deleting
he
historical
ontext
in
which
peasant
political
decision-making
ccurs,
by omitting
rucial
actual
information n
the
political
geneaology
of
both
the PCP-SL
and
its
leader,
Abimael
Guzmain,
and
by
ignoring
the coercive
impact
of Sendero's
authoritarian
ilitarydeology,
McClintock onstructs
n
image
of
Sendero
Luminoso
s
an
organically
ural
peasant
movementwhich
peaks
or the
felt
economic
or 'subsistence'
needs of the Peruvian
peasantry.
Sendero's
primary
peasant
base',
she
concludes,
are 'rural mallholders
who
are
not
particularly
ctive
n
the
market'
(1984:
82).
The tenuous
historical ocumentation
or
this
assumption
boutSendero's
exclusively
uralbase and
strategy
s denied
by
the
sequence
and
patterning
of
Sendero's
military
ctions
and
by
the texts
of
PCP-SL
party
documents.
McClintock's
omission
of this factual
information
on PCP-SL's
military
campaign
elates
to
her
fifth,
and
for our
purposes
inal,
supposition:
he
'encircling' trategy
of
'classic Maoism'.
Building upon
Mao
Zedong's
military
heories,
he PCP-SL eeks
to
develop
armed
truggle
n
two inter-
related theatresof operations: he countrysideand the city.62However,
whereas
Mao,
who elaboratedhis theories
around he
particular
ocial
and
political
conditions
of
China,
privileged
rural
actions and saw the
urban
insurrection
s
a final
step
in
the
overthrowof
the old
regime,
Guzman,
whose
party
seeks
to attain
power
in
the
quite
different
context of
Peru,
conceives
of
military
ctions
n
the
city
and the
countryside
s
parallel
and
simultaneous
renas
of
military
manoeuvre.63
n
Guzman's
wn
words,
Es
una
especificacion
e
la
guerra
popular
en el Perui acerdel
campo
el teatro
principal
de
las
acciones
y
de
las
ciudades
complemento
necesario'64
According
to this vision
of
complementary
heatres
of
operations,
the
peasantry anonlybe an effectivepoliticalactor n alliancewiththeurban
proletariat
ndcan
only
act
under
he
eadership
f the
revoutionary arty
as
the
ideological
and
politicalvanguard
f the
proletariat:
The Communist
Party
of
Peru,
a Marxist-Leninist-Maoist
arty
of
a
new
type, oyal
o its
principles
nd
programme,
onscious
of its
historic
mission as
the
organised
vanguard
of
the
Peruvian
proletariat,
has
assumed
ts
responsibility
o launch
he armed
struggle
o
fight
for the
seizure
of
power
by
the
working
lass
and
the
people,
and s
developing
guerrilla
warfare,
earning
rom advancesand
setbacks,
anning
more
widely heliving lamesof armed onflictandrooting hemmoredeeply
among
he
poor
peasants,principally,
nd
will
lead
in
building
evolu-
tionary
base
areas hatwill
finally
give
concrete
ormto the
triumphant
roadof
people's
war.65
This
strategy
of
guerrilla
warfare s based
on Mao
Zedong's heory
of the
cadre
party
as
'theconductor
of all
revolutionary
lasses
and
all revolution-
148
7/24/2019 D Poole nuevas cronicas del peru.pdf
18/60
THE
NEW
CHRONICLERSOF
PERU
arygroups'.66
he
implications
f this Maoist
principle
or
the PCP-SL
s,
in
Guzman's
words,
that
el
partido
iene
caracter emasas
pero
no es de
masas.
... Nuestro
partido
esun
partido
de
militantes,
e
dirigentes,
na
maquina
de
guerra
7
This
concept
of
the
cadre
party,
whi