This paper describes the recollections of social events involving local politics and communal autonomy of an indigenous community in conflicts in modern western-highland Guatemala, that is the sequel of the argument written by the same author issued in Anales de Estudios Latinoamericanos (No.32, Pp.29-31, 2012). The local indigenous people with whom the author conducted ethnographic study is the Mam (an ethnonym of the third largest population among Guatemalan Mayan Community).

    The series of conflicts proceeded as such; the conflicts began with a charge complaint of larceny against a local landowner. This person was accused of “owning land common as his own property,” on the communal water sources through private mediation by city mayor. The plaintiff was a group of members of the local development advisory group (Consejos Comunitarios de Desarrollo, COCODE), which the author named “political rebels.” There were common interests between the land owner and the city mayor’s group who claimed that the land would be of benefit to the “local economic development programs.” The rebels thought that the water source should be maintained as both communal natural resource and “sacred natural symbol of indigenous people.” The rebels’ strategies took a series of political actions; e.g. the criminal prosecution against communal sanction, the demonstration before city hall, and the public request for referendum. The reasons of their winning derived not only by their own actions but by the political climate of local autonomy that had been applied as the national legislations of decentralization policy, e.g. Decreto 14-2002, by the central government since the end of twenty centuries.

    The author treats mainly four episodes with his ethnographic interpretations; (i) Communal interpretations of the political rebels. After the success of the political demonstrations against the conservative mayor group, the deputy of COCODE stood in the mayor election. People interpreted a priori that he had intended to become a political leader with personal greed referring to the traditional interpretation that political participation is motivated by personal pursuit for nepotism or personal interests, not by public one. But there were circumstantial evidences a posteriori that he had decided to become a candidate because his idealism brought him more interest in the challenge to change the city’s status quo than in becoming mayor. (ii) Incendiarism case against the pick-up truck of a Catholic missionary. One family was labeled as an alien ethnic group, mestizo o ladino even though self-nominated as indígena, for their place of origin is in the Indian district outside of the town. The head of the family had been working for Catholic Church for a long time and his son became a priest in another town. Because of the history of ethnic relations of the town, the situation regarding this church was politically contradicting at that time. The gorgeous pick-up truck could be interpreted as xenophobic object of the alien by anyone regardless of the political parties they belong to. At one day before the city mayor election, this incendiarism case happened. (iii) Unexploded lynch against a person of political minority who was alleged fraud in the local election. The head of the family of the incendiarism was also rumored with vote manipulation in previous city mayor election. Because of the excitement of election day and the incendiarism case one day before, people were highly nervous against him. And the crowd grew to a mob to lynch him, but local police let him flee from the voting place and then he survived. (iv) So called, “divine punishments” of both sides among political enemies. After the awful and nervous days, people changed their interpretation of incendiarism case from accusing xenophobia to “divine punishments” against missionary receiving poor people’s donor charities. And then, after emerging this interpretation, the shop owned by the newly elected mayor and his family, was fired down by new years fireworks. People said that God also punished them not to be arrogant.

    There may be invisible discrepancy between political studies and political anthropology because of the segregation in research topics and objects. Political scientists may study focusing on “modern and western” political systems on one hand, political anthropologists may on “traditional and non-western” social systems as the political issues on the other. Breaking this discrepancy the author annotates the significance of treating comparative studies and in-depth interviews of modern indigenous issues, as a consequence of the fact that these anecdotes could be worth thinking.

Summary of same title of my paper, presented in "Co*Design" No.2, Pp.1-16, forthcoming in Summer, 2017

• +
  

Bibliography

• +
  

other information