Republicanismo indiano y crítica a la epistemocracia colonial
This work focuses on analyzing some philosophical grounds of what we can call Indian republicanism. By this expression I mean the political thought that support the criticism of the conquest of America and the defense of the right of self-determination of the nations of the "New World" aga...
Guardado en:
| Autor principal: | |
|---|---|
| Formato: | Online |
| Lenguaje: | spa |
| Publicado: |
Instituto de Filosofía Argentina y Americana, Facultad de Filosofía y Letras, Universidad Nacional de Cuyo
2023
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | https://revistas.uncu.edu.ar/ojs3/index.php/anuariocuyo/article/view/7125 |
| id |
I11-R90article-7125 |
|---|---|
| record_format |
ojs |
| institution |
Universidad Nacional de Cuyo |
| building |
Revistas en línea |
| filtrotop_str |
Revistas en línea |
| collection |
CUYO |
| journal_title_str |
CUYO |
| institution_str |
I-11 |
| repository_str |
R-90 |
| language |
spa |
| format |
Online |
| author |
Velasco Gómez, Ambrosio |
| spellingShingle |
Velasco Gómez, Ambrosio Republicanismo indiano y crítica a la epistemocracia colonial republicanismo conquista imperio epistemocracia pluralismo republicanism conquest colonialism epistemocracy pluralism |
| author_facet |
Velasco Gómez, Ambrosio |
| author_sort |
Velasco Gómez, Ambrosio |
| title |
Republicanismo indiano y crítica a la epistemocracia colonial |
| title_short |
Republicanismo indiano y crítica a la epistemocracia colonial |
| title_full |
Republicanismo indiano y crítica a la epistemocracia colonial |
| title_fullStr |
Republicanismo indiano y crítica a la epistemocracia colonial |
| title_full_unstemmed |
Republicanismo indiano y crítica a la epistemocracia colonial |
| title_sort |
indian republicanism and critique of colonial epistemocracy |
| description |
This work focuses on analyzing some philosophical grounds of what we can call Indian republicanism. By this expression I mean the political thought that support the criticism of the conquest of America and the defense of the right of self-determination of the nations of the "New World" against the arguments that justify the war of conquest and the imperial project of Spain. Defenders of the imperial project such as Ginés de Sepúlveda argue that, because of their barbarism, the original peoples of America are incapable of governing themselves and therefore must be subjugated by rational and more prudent nations and people like the Spaniards. This thesis that I call epistemocratic will later become a hegemonic theory of the political thought of Modernity to justify authoritarian states. Critics of the conquest and the Spanish empire in America such as Bartolomé de las Casas and Alonso de la Veracruz do not accept that the republican right of peoples to self-government depends on them being fully rational, but, nevertheless, they recognize the importance of this thesis. To refute the argument they do not question the epistemcratic principle itself, but confront the view that the peoples of the “New World” are barbaric and rationally inferior to Europeans, for they have good laws and rulers who in their own way seek justice. Therefore, in their own way, the natives of the “New World” are as rational as the Spaniards and have full capacity to govern themselves. This statement shows that Indian republicanism critical of conquest and empire is distinguished by a political, social, juridical and epistemic pluralism that opposes a univocal universalism that sustains the imperial epistemocratic argument. |
| publisher |
Instituto de Filosofía Argentina y Americana, Facultad de Filosofía y Letras, Universidad Nacional de Cuyo |
| publishDate |
2023 |
| url |
https://revistas.uncu.edu.ar/ojs3/index.php/anuariocuyo/article/view/7125 |
| topic |
republicanismo conquista imperio epistemocracia pluralismo republicanism conquest colonialism epistemocracy pluralism |
| topic_facet |
republicanismo conquista imperio epistemocracia pluralismo republicanism conquest colonialism epistemocracy pluralism |
| work_keys_str_mv |
AT velascogomezambrosio indianrepublicanismandcritiqueofcolonialepistemocracy AT velascogomezambrosio republicanismoindianoycriticaalaepistemocraciacolonial |
| _version_ |
1800220583065026560 |
| spelling |
I11-R90article-71252024-04-08T22:46:23Z Indian republicanism and critique of colonial epistemocracy Republicanismo indiano y crítica a la epistemocracia colonial Velasco Gómez, Ambrosio republicanismo conquista imperio epistemocracia pluralismo republicanism conquest colonialism epistemocracy pluralism This work focuses on analyzing some philosophical grounds of what we can call Indian republicanism. By this expression I mean the political thought that support the criticism of the conquest of America and the defense of the right of self-determination of the nations of the "New World" against the arguments that justify the war of conquest and the imperial project of Spain. Defenders of the imperial project such as Ginés de Sepúlveda argue that, because of their barbarism, the original peoples of America are incapable of governing themselves and therefore must be subjugated by rational and more prudent nations and people like the Spaniards. This thesis that I call epistemocratic will later become a hegemonic theory of the political thought of Modernity to justify authoritarian states. Critics of the conquest and the Spanish empire in America such as Bartolomé de las Casas and Alonso de la Veracruz do not accept that the republican right of peoples to self-government depends on them being fully rational, but, nevertheless, they recognize the importance of this thesis. To refute the argument they do not question the epistemcratic principle itself, but confront the view that the peoples of the “New World” are barbaric and rationally inferior to Europeans, for they have good laws and rulers who in their own way seek justice. Therefore, in their own way, the natives of the “New World” are as rational as the Spaniards and have full capacity to govern themselves. This statement shows that Indian republicanism critical of conquest and empire is distinguished by a political, social, juridical and epistemic pluralism that opposes a univocal universalism that sustains the imperial epistemocratic argument. Este trabajo se enfoca a analizar algunas ideas filosóficas que fundamentan los que podemos llamar republicanismo indiano. Con esta expresión me refiero al pensamiento político que sustenta la crítica a la conquista de América y la defensa del derecho de autodeterminación de las naciones del “Nuevo Mundo” frente a los argumentos que justifican la guerra de conquista y el proyecto imperial de España. Los defensores del proyecto imperial como Ginés de Sepúlveda argumentan que, a causa de su barbarie, los pueblos originarios de América son incapaces de gobernarse a sí mismos y por ello deben ser sometidos por naciones y personas racionales y más prudentes como los españoles. Esta tesis que denomino epistemocrática se convertirá posteriormente en una teoría hegemónica del pensamiento político de la Modernidad para justificar los estados autoritarios. Los críticos de la conquista y el imperio español en América como Bartolomé de las Casas y Alonso de la Veracruz no aceptan que el derecho republicano de los pueblos al gobierno propio dependa de que sean plenamente racionales, pero, no obstante, reconocen la importancia de esta premisa y por ello discuten. Para refutar el argumento no cuestionan el principio epistemocrático en sí mismo, sino que confrontan la opinión de que los pueblos del Nuevo Mundo son bárbaros y racionalmente inferiores a los europeos, pues tienen buenas leyes y gobernantes que a su modo procuran justicia. Por ello, a su modo, los naturales del Nuevo Mundo son tan racionales como los españoles y tienen plena capacidad para gobernarse a sí mismos. Esta afirmación pone de manifiesto que el republicanismo indiano crítico de la conquista y el imperio se distingue por sustentarse en un pluralismo político, social, jurídico y epistémico incluyente de la diversidad que se opone a un universalismo unívoco que sustenta el argumento epistemocrático imperial. Instituto de Filosofía Argentina y Americana, Facultad de Filosofía y Letras, Universidad Nacional de Cuyo 2023-08-29 info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion Peer reviewed article Artículo evaluado por pares Artigo revisado por pares application/pdf text/xml https://revistas.uncu.edu.ar/ojs3/index.php/anuariocuyo/article/view/7125 Cuyo. Anuario de Filosofía Argentina y Americana; Vol. 42 (2023): Dossier: Un republicanismo para América; 19-42 1853-3175 1514-9935 spa https://revistas.uncu.edu.ar/ojs3/index.php/anuariocuyo/article/view/7125/5835 https://revistas.uncu.edu.ar/ojs3/index.php/anuariocuyo/article/view/7125/6289 Derechos de autor 2023 Ambrosio Velasco Gómez https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/ |
