«mm a,” 5 1.:- .. $5M?” ; i. I" cpl». “ n u livid-.3 IN .I I ' If“. ‘- .1. .a. bug? .fidflu) u... .. .. din. _ , PR .7. 21.)}? :v . . ,..:;3:......« .0 13311 .. .1 .x $711.. . .11; n!)17-¥ l) ‘ AIM M» s “\ This is to certify that the dissertation entitled THE HIDDEN WOUNDS OF VIEQUES: A POLITICAL ECOLOGY OF DISEASE AND COLLECTIVE ACTIONS IN A MILITARIZED LANDSCAPE presented by VICTOR M. TORRES-VELEZ has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for the Doctoral degree in Department of Anthropology \lmr Wig/WC! M. Major Professor’s Signature 5/II/07- Date MSU is an affirmative-action, equal-opportunity employer -<¢--—-—-.—o----o—._-.—c—o--—u--—.-.-.—.-.—.-.-.-.—.-._.—-—._.-—.-.-—---—n--— m«-- —-—-—-_._.—.-.—-—.—.—-—.—.—-—a—o—.—c PLACE IN RETURN BOX to remove this checkout from your record. TO AVOID FINES return on or before date due. MAY BE RECALLED with earlier due date if requested. DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE 6/07 p:/CIRC/DateDue.indd-p.1 The Hidden \Vbtiiids of Vieques: A Political Ecology of Disease and Collective Actions in a Militarized Lar‘idscape \riictor l\I. rl‘orrcs—Vélcz A DISSERTATION Submitted to l\‘lic11iga.n State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Departi‘ncnt. of Anthropology 2007 ABSTRACT THE HIDDEN WOUDS OI“ \I'IEQUES: A P(])I.ITI(I.»‘\L ECOLOGY OE DISEASE AND (‘()I.I,.I:I("l‘l\"E ACTIONS I.\' A MILITARIZED LANDSCAPE By Victor M. Torres—Velez Infant mortality rates have decreased in all industrialized countries. including Puerto Rico. Yet in \I’ieques' municipality this rate has increased by 1‘2 percent. This and other dramatic changes in public health have taken place within the last 20 years. Recently. the inhabitants of \"ieques have massively organized around issues of health. mobilizing collective actions unheard of in Puerto Rico. This social movement. which has captured international attention. has cut across religions and political lines never before traversed within I’uerto Rican history. \Vhat are the factors triggering this social movement‘.’ How do the people of \r’ieques experience and make sense of these changes in public health? flow have these changes affected people’s Imrceptitms of health. illness and self'.) I suspect that by exploring the interplay between (I) changing perceptions of health risks and (‘2) shifting notions of self as (3) experienced by being and (‘Iwelling-in-a- world of environment. crises. we can get insights into these questions. By situating at the center of the analysis the relationship between illness and identity we can gain insights into the emergence of environmental movements as processes of identity formation. This project. explores how shared experience of illness can generate new questions. knowledge and understandings within connnunities experiencing critical health problems. I sustain that peoples embodied understantlings of the relation- ships between cnyiromnent and disease trigger— within militarized or industrialized landscapes— powerful cultural critiques that. offer insights into both modernitys fail- ttres and the emergence of social movements. Contents List of Tables ....................................................... List of Figures .......................................... . . . . . . ...... Introduction ........................................................ 1 Political Ecology of Disease: A New Approach 1.1 Political Ecology: Tll(‘()1’t-‘II(”2-1l Legacies 1.1.1 1.1.2 1.1.3 1.1.4 1.1.5 1.2 Medical Anthropology: Political. Critical and Ecological Approaches . 1.2.: 'V‘ Structuralism vs. .\Iat.erialism The Production of Nature The Construction of Nature Political Economy . Political Ecology and Environmental Justice I’oIiticz—tl Economy in Medical Anthropology Biocultnralism or Ecology and Biomedicine . Critical Medical Anthrot)ology . . Critical Medical Anthropology: 'I‘heoretical Limitations . I11terpretative vs. Critical Medical Anthropology . 1.3 Political Ecoltwv of Disease: A New Synthesis 2 Where, How and 'Why? 2.0.1 2.0.2 2.l).3 Research Site A Genealogy of Collective Actions . Health: The Missing Link iii V 13 14 16 [\J [\D [\D C! IO “*1 2.0.4 Methodology........................... 68 2.0.5 Participant Observation. Personal Experience and Activism . . T2 3 The IVIaking of a I\'Iilitarized Landscape 87 3.1 Spaces of 1_)omination: the "Local" as Produced by the "Global" . . 89 3.1.1 Pltel'lo Rico: The Gibraltar oftlte Caribbean . . . . . . . . . 92 3.2 Geographies of Resistance: the "Local” as Produced by Transnationalism 98 4 Reification, Biomedicine, and Bombs: V’Volnen’ 5 Experiences at the Heart of Vieques’ Social lV’Iovement 106 4.1 On Reification and Subjectivity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108 4.2 \Vomen‘ sExperiences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111 4.2.1 Everyday life. Illness and Bombs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111 4.2.2 Legitimation Crises . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116 4.2.3 Illness. Identity and Collective Action. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119 5 Testing. Health and Epistemological Struggles 126 5.1 Testing and Diagnosis: Tropes of Contestation . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128 5.2 Contesting Prognostic Determinism: the Case of Chelation . . . . . . 133 5.3 \\"orking within the Fences: Occupational I'Ii'lZ'c'tl‘tlS and Testing . . . . 114 5.4 After Testing: Reparation Debate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153 Conclusion 162 5.5 The Aleph as the Body. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102 List of Tables 2.1 Employment by Occupation in \"ieques 2 ‘7 Employment by Industry in Vieques . —v-—v List of Figures [9 Map of the Caribbean Map of Ptterto Rico . Map of Vieques and Navy’s Military Facilities Cennpatnento .lusticia y Paz Camp Garcia‘s Gates Guarded by the Police Shooting Range: Painting on Military Bases Fence Statue of Liberty: Painting on Military Bases Fence Pitirre: Painting on Military Bases Fence [5/ Ire/i rim/um (Wu/lo Campaign Campaigning for Option Two: Posting Signs Campaigning for Option Two: Handmade Poster Option Three Poster: Marx the Specter of Communism El Rife/7411111) Crib/10's: Option Two Victory . El litgfr-V'cr/i/Jn, Clio/10’s: Option Two Victory . The Death of Option Three: March The Death of Option Three: Arriving to Camp Garcia " The Death of Option Three: Digging tip the Hole The Death of Option Three: Buried in the Grave v i 85 85 86 86 Introduction Industrial and military activities have torn apart whole landscapes throughout the world. From Bhopal to Iraq. the scars left. on environments and people are unspeak- able. Those responsible for these scars liienefit greatly not only from their infliction. but also from keeping them hidden. Making these scars visible is at. the center of my (’lissertation. This is the story of how art island was used for military exercises and shaped by powtn‘fnl economic interests. It is also a story of how the wounds of a landscape are the wounds of its people. Finally. it. is the story of a. group of people who awakened to cast away the invisibility of their unspealcitble suffering. The island is Vieqnes. Puerto Rico. and the military exercises were carried out by the IS. Navy for more. than 60 years. The negative environmental consequences have been extensively documented. as have the resulting sharp increases in chronic diseases such as cancer. \‘\'ha.t has not been docuntented. however, is how the people of Vieques made sense of these. changes and how people came to terms with disease. suffering and death. What has not yet been analyzed is the conspiracy of invisibilities1 that. created and maintained the conditions under which military and econon’tic interests superseded lunnan life. The military presence in Vimues has a long history. and while resistance to their activities has always been present it was not until as recently as 1998 that a social movement with popular support emerged. How can we explain this overdue pitipnlar support; to the movement. despite the obvious negative envirt)nmental and health 1Through this concept. I want. to call attention to discourses that. even when generated by different institutions (the state. capital. biomedicine) have the same effect: obscure the origins of oppressive circumstam-es. This structural articulation of multiple discourses, that reinforce one another in their mystifying effect. is what I call Conspiratory. effects of the military? How can we explain the initial silence. despite the visible (—‘nviromental and health destruction left by the military? \Vhat factors sparked the emergence of the powerful movement. and its support. throughout the island? These questions led me to the examination of how important institutions. particularly the biomedical. establishment. participated in the "conspiracy of invisibilities.” That is. thrmrgh their twcryday encounters with people these institutions obscure the causal connections between envir<)mnental degradation. people’s health problems and the political economic system that depend on military presence. Could it be that. the unspeakable suffering of sick and ('Iiseased bodies was silenced. not because of an impossibility of assigning meaning to this experience. but because of this conspiracy of invisibilities? Another part of the answer lay in the manner in which social institutions. such as the health department. also function as bastions of public trust. As such. they have the power of shaping not. only peoples basic. ontological assumptions -— or what is the nature of reality — but also a person’s place within the social order. This institutional ability. however. is weakened when key institutions are unable to explain emerging e11vironmental and health crises. The emergence of multiple contradictions environmental. hmlth. institutional. and existential — offers a moment in which the conspiracy of invisibilities becomes visible. This dissertation is about this precise juncture where people become aware of and confront the forces affecting them. In this sense. it is about different perceptions of reality: on the one hand. the reality fostered by economic theory and liimnedicine. and on the other. the reality of people experiencing the negative consequences of global accumulation. This dissertation. thus. explores two facets of the same. process. It explains the process by which \f'ieques’ landscape became militarized and how this militarization is an integral part of a. global regime of capital aceurnulation. It explores the role biomedicine plays as a system of political legitinnition for this regime. Biomedicine. hmvever. is not going to be studied from within: on the contrary. it is going to be studied from people's ex1.)eriences confronting it. As such this dissertation is a cultural critiqut-é that stems from people’s own criticisms of biomedical and other institutions. Research Problem Infant mortality rates have decrmsed in all industrialized countries. including Puerto Rico. Yet in the nnmicipality of \r’ieques in Puerto Rico the infant mortality rate has lIlCI't‘ElSt‘d by 1'2 percent. V ieques also experienced a 40% increase in overall nitn‘tality rate. a li-lvf/f increase in cancer mortality rates and a. 253% increase in liver disease mortality. These dramatic changes in public health have taken place within the last 20 years (Nazario. 20(l1). ()yer that time. the inhabitants of Vieques have massively organized around issues of health. mobilizing collective actions unheard of in Puerto Rico. This social movement. which has captured international attention, cuts across Puerto Rican religious and political lines never previously transcended. What are the factors triggering this social movement? How have people‘s experiences of ongoing increases in health risks been integrated in this social mcwement'? How do the people of Vieques experience and make sense of these changes in public health‘.7 How have these changes affected people's perceptions of health. illness and self’.7 I will compare how lay people. scientists and gtwernment officials articulate competing discourses on disease etiology. as these feed into new identity formations leading to collective action. I aim to develop an analytical framework for understanding how drastic environnrental changes affect people’s perceptions of health and self within their c\.-'ei'y(lay lives. At the individual level, the experience of illness more often than not (‘iisetnpowers (Taussig. 1980). Howevm'. sometimes a collective and shared experience of illness can be empowering (Good. 1994a). The literature on critical medical anthropology, 1.)olitical ecology and social movements seldom examines this issue of socio-cultural em powerment connected with disease. This dissertation explores how shared experi— ence of illness generated new (‘111(—‘St.l()1'15. forms of knowledge, shared understamlings and innovative identities within cmmnui’iitics experiencing critical health problems. questions. knmvledges. understandings and it'lentities which culminated in collective action. I argue that people’s explanatory models of disease, introduced explanatory models that include social health and erwirmimental factors and departed from and challenged biomedical interpretations in a. manner that enal.)led emergent collectives to challenge the stg-ientisttic and socially atomizing medical status quo. I will argue that these challenges are rooted in the facts that. under the al)o\-'e-described conditions: health risks became more. obvious. biomedical explanatory models failed to address people's concerns and ("Xpt‘l'lt‘llFt‘S and new transnational discottrscs (cg. risk. rights and glolmlization) aided the refraining of individual and social heath issues. .\ly dissertation seeks to understand the interplay among changing perceptions of health risks and notions of self as experienced by being and dwelling-in-a—world of environment crises (Doyle. 2001: Lefebvre. 1974). I will explore relations between changing envirtmmmital and health conditions and their role in new forms of identity and collective action. I will develop an analysis that understt-tnds how the drastic ()11\'l1‘(“)11111€11tz-ll and health cl’ianges on Vieques have affected the perceptions of health. disease and self within the everyday lives of the people on the island. I will explore the effectiveness of these arguments as they relate to the social and ’7 enviromnental health crisis that has tileveloped over the past twenty years on V ieques but that until recently did not. provoke a strong social movement. The analysis of this case study will ctmtribute to ant:hropological them‘y with a frame- work to 1111(IGI'Sft-tlltl other cases similar to Viermes (Maxwell. 1998). My research con- tributimr. therefore. will demcmstrate how Vieques particular case clearly reveals envi- romnental and health contrz-tdictions typical of “our modern" condition. By studying these contradictions my research will contribute also to the untlerstanding of pro- cesses that could lead to social movements. Because of the increasing omnipresence of these envirtmmental and health contradictions. Vieques can reveal general lessons z-tpplicable to many places: hence. Vieques relevance to understanding a wide spread yet. narrowly recognized problem. In Chapter 1. I explore the historical development... strengths and weaknesses of the two main theoretical trz'tditions that inform my theoretical framework. These two are critical medical antltropology and political (:it'ology. I not only criticize the short- comings of dominant approaches to ei’iviromnetital and health tn'oblems but I offer an alternative that I call the political ecology of disease. \Yhat makes my approach different is that I look at links between capital accumult-ition. environment. and health through the tnialytical lens of an anthropology of disease. The methodology of my dissertation is explained in Chapter 2. In this chapter I explore how the fit between my “data" gathering methods and the purpose of my dis- sertat ion. That is. if the (,lissertation is trying to demonstrate —among other things— the ontological validity of embodied experiences in \""ieques. my “dz-ita" gathering methods also follow this epistemology. In other words. I explain the ways in which my research design is consciously rooted in my subjective experiences as a Puerto Rican doing research in a highly political colonial context. I explore the implications for my research of my own experience of becoming politically active in V'ieques’ social movement. Moreover I reflect on the implications of my personal experience with disease and death. which gttide me in understanding people’s narratives of suffering. In Chapter 3. I explain the process by which \‘ieques' landscape was made in the image of capital. I-lere. the militarization of this landscape is connected to development economics. I argue. that the expropriation of two-thirds of the island speaks of the necessity to secure capital investments. access to markets and access to raw materials in Lat in America and capital accumulation by inilitt-u‘y business (selling weapons and renting the lands to other nation-states). The aim of this chapter is to illustrate how the underlying assumptions of economic laws. create a fictitious separation between productive activities. and the places and the bodies upon which they depend (Polanyi. 19.57). This fictitious separation allows industries to conceptualize industrial waste products as externalities. thus making people and the envirtmment responsible for the high public health costs. Chapter -1 will address women's everyday life experience of being sick and the social implications of dealing with disease. I will explore oral histories that exemplify what it is like to confront chronic diseases such as cancer in a militarizcd landscape. I will look at the ways in which people struggle to make sense out of their painful experiences. .1\Io1.'eo\'et‘. I will explore the creative ways — such as alternative medicines — developed to cope with sickness. The aim of the chapter is to show the connection between disease and identity. I argue that the experience of disease can. instead of victimizing. be empowering for it forces the subject into a re-evaluation of his/her place in the social scheme that in most cases is political. This re-evaluation of the self is possible, at least in part. because the disciplinary power of governmental institutions has faded away in the face of health crises and people are able to re—articttlate their subject positions in empowering ways. 'I‘hese re—articulations find the status (luo no longer acceptable and generate active where there used to be passive subjects. This new subject position is what explains the emergence of the social movement. on Vieques — a movement that finally proved capable of forcing the Navy off the island. Hence, the connection between disease. identity and social movements becomes clear. In Chapters .3. I argue that health and enviroinuental crises reveal the contradictions of current systems of political legitimation. However. a crisis of governability does not come solely from the negative impact of externalities. but is intimately connected to the political systems onttfilogical stance. That. is. a 1,.)olitical system that, because it is based on modernist ideals (of rationality and science), eclipses participation and democracy thus undermining its own legitimacy. I will show that in the case of Vieques not only economic but. biomedical rationality obscures unequal relationships. In this sense. and in the context of \"ieques‘ public health crises. biomedicine obscures more than it rtweals. In specific terms. I will be looking at the epistemological struggles between two diffe- rent explanatory models of disease (embodied perception vs. disembodied science). \Vllttl'OV’t’I' expert knowledge (be it, governmental or biomedical) produces and relies on the exclusionary and undemocratic discourse of science. science itself may become a. terrain of struggle. In the process. the bicnnedical institutions of the state was thrown into legitimation crisis and scientific discourses were bent and reshaped by activists 6 in ways that demz’mded public participation. If scientific discourse is the ultimate source of validation and legitimation for the state. then any questioning of such a system is a questioning of the state itself. I argue that these crises — of the environment... the body and of legitimation (biomedicine and the state) —— foster social movements such as those in \"'l(-,‘(111(:}S._ social movements that. try to resolve their problems through unconventicmal ways (conventional meaning through the traditional governmental channels). In this sense these crises are also a crisis of the self in which the worldview of those affected by disease is fundamentally altered. \J Chapter 1 Political Ecology of Disease: A New Approach The present chapter will explore the historical (‘levelopment strengths and weaknesses of the two main traditions that inform my theoretical framework. These two are critical medical anthropology and political ecology. In the end of this chapter I provide a new theoretical synthesis that attempts to overcome their main limitations. This new synthesis I call political ecology of (.lisease. 1.1 Political Ecology: Theoretical Legacies Intellectual genealogies of political ecology (Poet and \“\s"atts. 1996; Paulson, 2003) locate anthropology's theoretical contribution somewhere between cultural ecology and political economy. For example. I’aulson et al. noted that. During the past two decades. a basic notion of political ecology as the coming together of political economy and cultural ecology has been applied and developed through research. analysis. and 1‘)ractice across discij‘)lines (I’aulson. 2003. 3). What is common to these two approz—tches is a materialist. conception of reality. For political econtnny the most effective way of explaining reality is through the study of 8 market relations. Within this approach culture and ecology are not taken into consid- eration. Cultural ecology. on the other hand. do not take into account larger j‘)olitical forces at work in the transformation of environments. Thus. political ecology’s de— velopment has to be understood as an attempt of overcoming these limitations. I will explain the dtw'elopment of political ecology through a discussion of structuralist and materialist theories as they play an important role in both political economy and cultural ecology. 1.1.1 Structuralism vs. Materialism Strticturz-‘ilisni was. as ()rtner (I994) asserts; "the more-or-less single-handed invention of Claude Levi-Strauss. [and] the only genuinely new paradigm to be developed in the sixties” (379). This paradigm centers its analysis on the linguistic phenomena and establishes that the structure of the mind/ brain reflects. through language. the structure of society. The target. of study then was the concepts and ideas that people articule-‘ue to explain their world. For this paradigm. speech was a compound of surface-strttctures and deep-structures. Surface—structures represent the conscious speech. whereas tleep—structtn'es the unconscious. the internal grammar that makes possible any meaningful connnunication. These internal structures are not concrete n’ianifestations of reality. but. cognitive models of reality. It is clear that. Levi-Strauss" analysis borrowed from linguistics the distinction between language and speech. This approach does not take terms. concepts or symbols as independent entities; it rather analyzes the relz‘ttionships between them. In this way no symbol has meaning by itself but only in relation to others: tl’ierefore the notion of a conceptual system is introduced. Through this particular analytical methodology the aim was to discover general laws of human cognition: the unconscious regularities of human thought. The principle argument was that all humans share something in connnon: to distinguish binary oppositions. \Vithin this frammvork another inniortant dichotomy is presented and is that of culture/nature. Basically this conceptualization expresses that human beings not only take control. through cultur'e (reason). over nature. but over their own animal instincts they thereftn'e transform themselves into cultural (rationz'il) beings 9 as well as transforming the "natural world into their habitat. C‘ultural ecology emerges as a materialist response to both American Symbolic anthro- pology and French Structural z-urthropology: both of which share the same tlreoreti ‘al ass..nrpt ions. Structural anthropology centers its analysis on the linguistic phenom- ena and establishes that the structure of the mind/brain reflects. through language. the structure of society. For cultural ecologists to access the “structure of the mind" was a futile enterprise. hence they proposed to understand social organization through the observe-rble relationship between human and their environments. Therefore. envi- ronmental conditions could be treated as fixed. measurable and objective. Because of its association with (~)\v’()lllII()ll‘(11'}-' thetn'y. cultural ecology developed a te- leological notion of cultural development based on a hierarchy of stages of social corn- plexity and advancernent. Within this framework industrialized countries represent the latest stage. of developrrrent whereas rrorr-industrial societies represent the earliest ones (Ortner. 1974. 377). This logic is best observed in developrrrental agendas that since the fifties have justified interventions (biomedical, developrrrental or otherwise) in "Third \\'orld"‘ countries. Other prtnionents within cultural ecology argued that instead of l.aving a grand homogenous evolution. (:lifferer‘it. cultures adapted to their specific erivir'onnrent in particular ways. Thus. sirrrilar‘ities in adaptation respond to similarities in environmental conditions. Ecological atitln'opology is another strand sharing nrost of cultural ecologists’ assump- tions. The difference is that. its proponents argue to make ecosystems the center of the analysis. as opposed to culture. Human populations. thus. are treated as one more element within a bioj')hysical system. The classic example of this approach is ltappapor't's ethnography on Papua New Guinea. The pig killing rituals serve to control pig overpopulation in order to protect the balance of their tropical ecology. The thermostatic character of culture in this approach is salient (Paulson, 2003, 3). Despite these differences. both ecological ant.lrropologists and cultural ecologists corr- (‘ej’itualize culture pragrrratically as either the cause or the effect of adaptation to the environment. If) This trend within cultural ecology could be (tharacterized as the homeostatic model in which. instead of looking at how the environment stimulates the development of culture. culture was posed as the regulator of the environment. In other words. cultur‘e functions as a mechanism to maintain an existing relationship with the environment (Ortner. 1991. 378.). \ , 1.1.2 The Production of Nature Structuralist approaches are. 1:)1'edicated upon a dualist epistemology— at the core of .\Iodernity itself— that views nature as a discrete ontological entity outside of society. Ecological .\larxists understz-md (Harvey: 1996; O’Connor. 1998; Smith, 1984b), on the other hand. that “nature” is the outcome of social 1‘)rocesses. nature sel'mrate from society has no meaning . . .The relation with nature is an historical product. and even to posit nature as external . . . is absurd since the very act of positing nature requires entering a certain relation with nature (C'Tastree and Braun. 1998. 7). In his seminal book. (hicccn Dccclopmt-“nt (Smith. 1984a). Neil Smith demonstrates the ways in which capitalist processes produce and reproduce whole lands tapes in the image of exchange-vah1e. The productimi of landscapes as exchange-value is the result of the object //"s11l‘i'jt>(-t. distinction that made everything that is "external” the object of profit. Smith argues that. although society/nature relationships are utilitarian by default— since human beings have. to satisfy material/semiotic necessities— the trans- fornmtion from use-value nature relations (non-capitalist) to exchange value nature. relations (calntalist) have created unforeseen social and environmental ccmtradictions. .lames O'Connor is. among others who build upon Smith insights. an important. exponent of ecological .\larxism. In his work. O'Connor tl‘ieoretically links current (.‘ll\'ll'()lllll()l[tell crises with capitalist. production. Capitalism. as O’Connor argues. is a crisis—ridden and a crisis-tlependent system. It is a crisis-ridden system because 11 overproduction creates a fall in the prices. which leads to economic crises. It. is a crisis- dependent system because it necessitates from this crisis to expand its productive activities. In its attempt to resolve this crisis of accumnlation. capital restructures its productive forces and its productive relations. Cost-cutting in the production process— or in variable capital: reduction in wages. seizing workers. etc.— is one of the two alternatives to deal with its internal contradiction. The other one is through geographical expansion— through the invasion of new domains for commodity product ion. .\ct ually the geographical expansion is a consequence of this cost-cutting strategy. Because of this. capital is always seeking places in which the prec'éonditions of production are. the most favorable for its cost-cutting strategies. The “Second (‘ontradictitm of Capital“ arises when production conditions 1 are put into risk by this process of cost-cutt ing or transference of costs to the "external” world of production. In other words. Increasingly generalized. the externalization of costs by cz—rpital is increas- ingly degrading the “external” conditions necessary for the production and reproduction of labor and nature. and therefore degrading the con- ditions necessary for the producticm and accunutlation of capital (Rudy. 1994. 98). A shortctnning of this model is that—and similar to structtu'alism— subjects are. con- ceptualized as passive and structural changes can only emerged from within the sys- tem itself. in this case through. e11viromnental crises. Also. capitalism is depicted as homogenous. unchanging and teleological. 1Within this .\'eo—.\larxist framework. (fCullliul‘S is trying to illustrate that the production con- dit ions are not only situated in labour power (as traditional Marxism sustained) but also in the pro- duction relations (type of mediations with the natural and the social realm and its consetutences). In other words. the production conditions imply more than the reproduction of labour power. because it also implies the reproduction of the. conditions (environment. social relations. etc.) that enable labour power to exist. This not only includes the technical and social preconditions but also the. "external nature" as well. Any impairment in the reproduction conditions. might lead capital to crises defined by barriers to production. 1.1.3 The Construction of Nature Poststructuralist umlerstandings of nature within political ecology. point out that that which materialists recognize as the bedrock of reality. namely nature. is in fact the jn'oduct of social constructions. The emergence of the discourse on nature, as an indepemlent. entity is indeed historically and culturally specific. Authors such as Soper (199(3) argue that the record of the practices that went into producing nature have been erase. In Ilaraway's words nature "cannot. pre-exists its construction” (1992. 29(5). This is, because nature apart from the lnnnan activities that produce it cannot exist ontiohigically. This separation of nature from society. however, serves the purpose of privileging certain practices of knowledge prmluction over others. Science is that privileged site of knmvledge production because it is based upon the assumption that unmediated transcendental truths can only be attain through the objective and unbiased ways of scientific practices. This epistemology discredits other I. q ways of knowing categorizing them as "traditional "irrational." “rural/pastoral" or simple beliefs. Ntnietheless. as feniinists have point. out. “Every aspect of scientific theory and j'n‘actice expresses socio-polit ical interest. cultural themes and metaphors. and professional negotiations for the power to name the world” (Bird. 1987). These powers to name the world inherently obscure or perhaps disappear - as a magicians trick — the socio-political causes of environmental problems. For instance. Taylor (_ 1997). in his discussion of the social ccmstructicm of “global environmental problems,” explains that. I'PSct-II‘Cllt‘l'S know that climate change is a social problem since it is through industrial production ...that generate greenhouse gases. Nonetheless. it. is physical change ...that is invoked to pron'toted policy responses and social change. not the political and economic injustices of the present system (Taylor. 1997. 157). As Harding ( 199 1) explains. how do "we" know what. "we” know, and how what. “we” know is not only highly situated and. partial but it. is also systematically crosscut 'l 3 by power (,lilfei'mitials along class. ethnicity and gender. In other words. there is a need for qualifying who personifies the "we” producing knowledge and what are the implications of such knowledge for those left ottt of its production. The point of these criticisms is to make visible that "power relations become naturalized in our representations of nature" (Castree and Braun. 1998. 19). However as Castree explains. quoting l-lz-iraway. that. stressing the contingency of what counts as “reality" is not a denial of natures materiality. but rather. a recognition that nature "is collectively. materially. and sentiotically cmistructed— that is. put. together. made to cohere. worked up for and by tts in some ways and not others7 (Castree and Braun. 1998. ‘25). 1.1.4 Political Economy Political economy emerges questioning the classical economist’s assumption that the int ernatiomtl system was based on synnnetrical economic relationships between equally standing nation—states. As Rist (1997") reminds us. the “idea of a “nation” current in economic theory — that. is, of a tightly knit unit within an international system. each of whose parts is at once autonomous and equal to all the others” is more than problematical because it does not ('()1‘1‘(-‘S})(')Il(il with the reality of worlt'l-ntarkets (Hist. 1997. 10(3). Political economy. based on \\='a11erstcin‘s world—system and the dependency school’s core/peripltery theory. was particularly critical of economic relationships between "industrialized" and "(.1e\.«'elopi11g” countries. "[The] internatiorml system. far from guaranteeing the Souths prosperity. brought dominatitm effects to bear upon it and locked it in (lept-Andence” (llist. 1997. 109). The critique was against the transna- tional companies and US interventions in foreign countries throughout the sixties and seventies. The prevailing dt‘ictrine at the time (which has hardly changed since) 11 based the development” of the non-indttstrial countries upon. three pillars: massive transfers of (mainly private) capital. exports of raw nutte.riz’rls. and the comparative advantage supposed to benefit all market. traders (Rist. 1997. 113). The unequal character of these economic relations overwhelmingly 1')enefited “indus- trializcd" countries over “developing“ ones. But this paradigm was not limited to exploring situations of unequal exchange but also of understanding. the relationship between external and internal forces as forming a complex whole whose structural links are not based on mere external forms of ex- ploitat ion and coercion. but. are rooted in coincidences of interest between local dominant classes and international ones. and. on the other side. are challenged by local dominated groups and classes (Rist. 1997. 116). The Dependista School posed a radical challenge to the dominant paradigm of mod- ernization. By arguing in terms of internatiot’tal structure . . . the (’lependistas brought. to light the national and international mechanisms for the appropriation of surplus by the central economies. and demt)nstrated that the accutnulation regime in the old industrial countries could not be reproduced in the periphery (Rist. 1997. 118). 1’)ependistas. however "did not challenge the basic presuppositions of that system. which come down to the idea that growth is necessary to gain access to the \Vestern mode of consumption" (Hist. 1997. 1‘21). .\l('>reover. (lependistas neither consider the cultural aspects of development. nor the possibility of altt.‘rnat.ive models. nor the eco- logical consequences of these Western epistemologies outside the realm of economics and politics. 1.1.5 Political Ecology and Environmental Justice Political ecology emerged ottt of the growing politization of the environment. particu- larly where changes in land use practices were a result of pressures of the global mar- ket economy. lr‘tmctionalist approaches. based upon systems theories such as cultural ecology and ecological anthropology. became in(’-a}')a.ble of explaining land degradation under the pressures of the international economy. Ecological anthropologists main- tained that the regulation of “culture” would suffice to bring back ecological stability into intensive agricultural practices. Political ecologists. on the other hand. argue that the problem with these functionalist approaches was that they understood, “Culture as a homeost at or regulator with respect [to] enviromnental stalnlity” without taking into account that societies “were. actually part of large. complex political economies” (Peet. and \V'atts. 1996. 5). Land degradation among peasants became the center of this critique because "culture” was not self-regulating the ecological “instabilities” of intensive agricultural practices. The criticism launched against. cultural et“ol<*)gy and ecological anthropology stem from the fact that these two ecological approaches were indeed heavily influenced by evolutionary theory. This is even more so within the quarter of medical anthropology known as biocultural anthropology. \‘Ve can observe this in the symmetry of their approaches. in the case of cultural ecology and medical anthropology they use as a heuristic device the human/nattire/culture triad to understand seen‘iingly “irrational” human/emironmcntal relationships. The heuristic device of iiioculturalists. on the other hand. was the 11()Sl/I)HllItigt‘lly/(‘ll\"11‘()11111(.‘11i triad used to understat‘id adaptation. in both cases. norerreless. culture is seen homeostaticallv. as either the cause or the effect of adequation to the ei'ivironment. The emergence of political ecology has been associated with criticisms of ecological anthropology and cultural ecology but not of bioculturalism. Because of this. political ecology has not. focused centrally on concerns about disease and health. :\rloreover. political ecology’s primary concern has been to understand land degradation as a. translocal process heavily influenced by global economy. rather than as a close-system 16 in which "culture" is regulating lu111ran/environmenta1 interactions. Broadly. political ecology explores the relations between human society, (viewed in it s bio—cultural-political complexity) and a significantly humanized nature (Greenberg and Park. 1991). In other words. within political ecology. environment and society are. conceptualized as dialectically interwoven through processes of “creative (:lestructicm” that mutually constitute and reconstitute human/envir(_)mnental relationships (Baer. 1996: C'astree and Braun. 1998). Political ecology approaches human/environmental relationships not as if they were taking place. in a spatio/temporal \Ar'acuum— as many systems theories imply— but as mutually and untwenly co-evrflving through time. The analysis of power relations is key within this scheme because the development of a specific set. of htnnan/environmental relationships is not naturally given but is the result of social conliict over resources. Although feminist political ecology has gone beyond asking "who gets what" by raising epistemological, ideological and discursive questions over "who and how” science. local knowledge and the environment gets defined (Ferguson. 1997. 4). this has not happened across the board. We need to remember that "political ecology is an analytical framework use by a1ithropologists. geographers. political scientists. ecologists and other natural scientists” (Ferguson. 1997. :3). Recently. political ecology has again become the center of attention within academic discussions. this time in the latest issue of Human Organization. The main criticism against political ecology is that it has become too political at the expense of the ecological (Paulson. 299.3). Unconvincingly, Vayda and \fV’alters (1999). the main proponents of this criticism— voiced by Paulson et al.- argue that a remedy against this shortcoming is to begin research with ecological events. However. contributors Derman and Ferguson (2003) explain that their. case study of water reform in Zimbabwe. illustrates a problematic aspect of V'ayda and \Yalters‘ (1999) call to identify environmental change as the starting point of analysis. The study calls attention to the importance of a situated. historically aware analysis that considers the political, discursive, 17 and ecological to be mutually constituted (Ferguson and Derman, 290.3. ti). By looking at the multiple actors histories. ambiguities. and contestations at work in Zimbabe’s water reform. the authors posed an example in which dominant. discourses on development are indeed locally (lomestic-ated. hence assuming “varied faces and forms as they are tyranslz-itc'd from the center outward” (Ferguson and Derman, 2003, 3). The representation of Zimbabe‘s water reforn‘i, then, do not give analytical pri- macy to "global forces” — as some. political ecologists have been accused of doing— it, rather shows how power circulates differentially among multiple scales and actors negotiating their particular positions and interests. Another important. body of literature concerned about ecological problems is the en- virtnunental justice literature. This sociologicz-il literature has paid great attention to the unequal distribution of toxic wastes and peoples struggle over unhealthy environ- ments. ”()Wt‘Vt‘l'. it has not paid attention to the impact. of such changes 011 peoples everyday lives and on their equally changing perceptions of self. While. the environ- mental justice literature has explored wtnnen’ s centrality in social movements it has done so in rather a-tliem'etical terms. In fact. while often acknowledging the negative impact of envirt)mncntal problems along ethnic and class lines the literature tends to unproblematically represent women as unitary subjects. This overlooks the ways in which women re—situate and negotiate their selves in specific subject positions. Likewise. this inattention to women" s identity formation hinders the possibility of understanding the factors triggering a social. movement. (Di Cllll'O, 1998: Moore and Head. 1993: Epstein. 1997). l-P’erhaps l')(-)("clllh'(‘ its US. focus the environmental justice literature has not. paid attention to the. translocal transference of the negative conse— quences of economic processes originating from industrialized countries of the North into the South. Building on the work of feminist. anthropologists such as Barbara Bose Johnston (199-1: 1997). Bandarage (199T). Rocheleau (1999), Ferguson (1997), whom had paid attention to these issues. I will attempt. to address these gabs in the environnrental justice literature. As the work of these feminist anthropologist. and the environmental literature have pointed out. enviromnental problems affects 18 women (lispi'ojxn'tionally. hence the importance of understanding women’s role in these processes. As we have seen. in its incejf)tion political ecology emerged within the dualist paradigm of st ructuralism. Even when researchers were considering the impact of global forces on land degradation— hence transcending the notion of enclosed systems— their ana- lysis (‘\\'atts. 195.75: Blaikie and Brookfield. 1987; Blaikie, 1985) was limited to pro- duction processes in which male. rural and third world subjects were the center of attention (Faulson. 2003). Hence, the role of women. subsistence agriculture and peas- ants resistance was overwhelmingly absent (Ferguson. 1997; Rocheleau et al.. 1999). .\loreover. because of its Marxists materialist..‘s inheritances. the relationship between people and the em'iromncnt was 1,)rimarily coriceptualized in economic terms— the last determinant. zu'gument. The role of people’s conceptions and agencies. therefore. was similarly missing. 1.2 Medical Anthropology: Political, Critical and Ecological Approaches Medical Anthropology is a fairly recent. subfield within Anthropology (whether cul- tural or biocultural): however. it. has undergone dramatic. theoretical. methodological and practical changes within the last 30 years. For instance. during the sixties applied 11'l(,‘(ll("'(ll ant hropologists were associated with improving interventionist medical agen- das within colonies and former colonies. During the seventies. these medical anthro- pologists~ e1)istemological stance came under fire by a new breed of anthropologists who argue that the former were uncritically invested in the bion’iedical model of dis- ease. hence disregz-irding people‘s understandings. These and other criticisms sparked long—standing debates that generated new theoretical positions within the discipline. Among these tlu—‘oretical positions we find: biocultural appr(_)a_ches, interpretative ap- proaches. critical medical approaches. ecological approaches and polit.ice-ecological a p} )roa c h es. l9 1.2.1 Political Economy in Medical Anthropology Political economy within medical anthropology (PEMA). came as a reaction from "Third \\'orld" academics who understood that \Vestern represeiitations of the “Other” not only "were one—dimmrsional. a—historical and static. but. were the source of justi- fications to legitimize \Vestern imperialist expansion (.\lorsy. 1996: Said. 1979; Said. 1993). These criticisms stem from the fact that. applied. n‘iedical anthropology (and cultural ecology in medical anthropology) as a sub-discipline started with the in- tent to make more efficient medical interventions. primarily within colonies or former colonies. that is. populations mzn'ked as cultm'ally or ethnically “Other” (i\~lorsy. 199(3). Applied Medical anthropologists’ work was to understand and use natives’ disease explanatory models in order to improve natives' acceptance of biomedical in- terventions. These medical interventions were often part of large development prejects founded by supranational institutions such as the “(odd Bank and the International L\l(.)netary Fund among others. In response to the uncritical applied work done in the name of development. PEMA began to question the rigidly defined boundaries of ecosystems or connnunities. to understand the health implications of transnational and translocal eti-onmnic 1.)rocesses within specific locales. PEMA overcon'ies the tra- AL ditional treatment of societies or connnunities as islands unto themselves. with little sense of the larger systems of relations in which these units are embedded” (Ortner, 199-1. 38(3). As .\lorsy (199(3) explains. l’lCMA is an approach to history and culture. including the culture of health and sickness that sees the Other as different but connected. a prmluct of a particular history that is itself intertwined with a larger set of economic. political. social and cultural processes to such an extent. that. aimlytical separation of “om.” history and "their” l’iistory is impossible (.\lorsy. 1990'. ‘22). The PFMA approach has also included the insights of dependency theory by looking at the way in which. the dialectical relationship had been effectively obscured in medical an- thropological discourse by models that. juxtapose. "\Xs'estern” and “non- \\'estern" medical systems and straightforwardly connect poor health to the inaccessil)ility of "\\'estern" medicine (.\lorsy. 1996, 27). If we recall. this very same logic that situates "industrialized countries” at the top of the evolutionary ladder is also found within cultural ecology. This logic e‘tchieves two things: to justify intervention and. to validate such interventions on the basis of superior scientific knowledge. PEMA. just like Cultural Ecology. is a materialist approach that intends to distance itself frotn what its proponents consider to be unattainable (or "soft" ) positions of constrtu-tivists and symbolic anthropologists. \'\'e can observe this in Morsy‘s characterization of criticisms of medical knowledge as "pt)stmodern.” “antimedical” vilifications of biomedicine (Morsy. 1996. 31). Quoting Navarro she states that, “cap- italist medicine is controlling medicine. because it, is effective. not vice versa. To think otherwise—as the antimedicine positions do— ...is tantamount to believing that medicine is a complete falsification that people have swallowed in their igno- rance" (.\lorsy. 1996. 31). The problem with this assertion is that it conflates a multiplicity of different layers within a single pragmatic raticniality-~< medicine works. First ly. medicine is “effect ive" in very ccnicrete contexts. To say that medicine is valid because it is effective is a St‘lf-I'(‘f(‘l'(’llll‘dl tautology that asserts its authority even in domains in which it. does not work — for instance the amazing health improvements witnessed within the 19th century had to do more with simple sanitation than with emerging biomedical technologies. St—‘condly. to validate medicine on the basis that. “it works" is to obfuscate the highly cultural pragmatic rationality underlining such assumptions. This [)1‘2-‘tgllletl ic rationality is tmique to \Vesterners in the sense that it. is in itself cultural: it is not beyond culture. yet it. is seen as the bedrock of a reality that rules out other cmtologies. To overlook this is to ignore the ways in which medicine contributes to the reproduction of social power relations in capitalist society. 1.2.2 Bioculturalism or Ecology and Biomedicine ‘.\l<~>dical antln'opology did not benefited only from including political economic con- cerns within their approaches but also from ecological ttnderstandings that allowed them to explore interconnections between disease. culture and environment that. were absent. from biomedical approaches. This did not. meant. however that applied medical alll'lll'”l“~)10gy was critical of bimnedicine. We can see this in the work of biocultural anthropologists that while keen of the relationship betwcwn disease and environment shared with applied medical antlnfopologists their investment in a biomedical model that would only recognize pathogen/host interactions within a conveniently closed system (biological or enviroiimental). As Brown et. al. (1996) explains “diseases cannot be explained as purely ‘things in tl’iemselves’; they must be analyzed and un- derstood within a. human context— that is. in relation to ecology and culture” (Brown et. al.. 1990'. 184). Within this model. “disease is a process triggered by an interaction between a host and an enviroimiental insult. often a patl'iogenic organism or ‘germ.’ " but in order for disease to occur. the immunological system of the host has to be compromised by breaking with the host / pathogen balance (Brown et al., 1996. 187). As Brown et. al. (1996) explains. an “ecosystem is maintained through mutually dependent interactions between members of the system and that the common goal of the various species in the system is hmneostasis” (Brown et al.. 1996, 187). The concept. of culture is key within this framework because it is understood as “a mecha- nism of adaptation to environmental threats. such as diseases, which act as agents of natural selecticm in the evolution of both human biology and culture” (Brown et al.. 1996.184) The prime example of considering culture as a regulator. which looks at the relation- ship between host[it”pe’ithogens and erivironment. within medical ant.ln'opology is the sickle cell gene. This gene is a trait found primarily in populations of West Africa and is responsible for protecting them from the endemic malaria characteristic of that region. It is the result of complex interactions between man made environmen- tal changes. the. abundant, presences of the mosquito-vector of malaria and a genetic disorder selected against this ("lisease (Levins and Lewcmtin. 1985). ()ne oft he fundamental problems with this approz-tch is that its emphasis on hmneostasis— the integration of environment. culture and disease into a stable socio/ecological system— neglects the particular ways in which power relations and conflicts are re- sponsible for the tm-tn—made creation of both unhealthy environments and disease (.\1orsy. 199(5: l’eet and Watts. 19915). The. clear boundaries of ecosystems— which are key within this framework—— crumbles when larger polit.ical/econmnic processes are taken into account. Largely influenced by political ecot‘tomy and dependency theory. Critical Medical .~\nthropology (CMA) emerged as a reaction to the imperialist legacy of these con- ceptions. Instead of treating societies as islands unto themselves. CMA. similar to l’li.\1:\. emphasized the uneven emergence and distribution of disease. which had to be explained in relation to larger politico—economic systems. \Vhere CMA differs from PEMA is in its questioning of biomedicine as a superior healing system. The presumed certainty. which gives “superiority” to this biomedical model ofdisease. is based upon the germ theory. which maintains that disease can be traced to a single physiological entity. \\'hi1e this is true of a few infectious diseases (which has been successfully explained by this model) it fails in the face of chronic diseases that cannot be pinned down to a single cause. Despite chronic diseases being endemic itt contexts of envirtinmental crisis. the biomedical model of disease has dominated and continues to dominate pttblic etiologic ('liscussions. This dichotomous and atomistic (host/pathogen) understa—mding of disease. validates biomedicine as the bedrock of reality while devaluing other non-Western ontologies (Lock and Sheper—Hughes. 1996: .\lorsy. 199(5). People’s alternative understandings of health and illness are thus denied (Good. 1991c: l\'leimm~tn. 1992). These and other criticisms sparked lcmgstanding debates that generated new theoreti- cal positions within medical z-mthropology. Hence. before characterizing CMA. let us explore the debates between bioculturalists (Wiley. 1992: Leatherman and Thomas. 1993) and critical medical anthropologists (Singer. 1993: Morgan, 1993) that took place early in the nineties. Particularly the ones that were the result of the 1991 93 AAA symposium entitled Politicol—Economic Perspectrves in Biological Anthropol- ogy: Building (1 B/ocu/ftmtl .S‘_t/'/t.//tcs/'s. later published in the Medical Anthropology Quart el'ly. This debate came as a result of the. recognition that "biological anthropology has reached a point where a. paradigmatic expansion is both possible and necessary” (Leatherman and Thomas. 1993. 2114). Characterizing the theoretical evolution that leads to this assertion Ime‘ttl'iet'inz-m et al. explains that. in the 1909’s and early 1979's l.)iologica.l anthropologists were largely con— cerned with understanding adaptations to physical and biotic extremes. 1n the late 1979s and ’1 9811s we began to recognize that other stressors, such as umlernutrition. were more pm'vasive and often had a greater im- pact. on human biology than purely 1:)hysical and biotic ones. At the same time resmrchers began to note that all stressors and the responses they engender passed through a sociocultural filter (Leatherman and Thomas. 1993. 2111). This theoretical evolution. however. did not emerge from internal self-criticisms; on the contrary it emerged from critical medical anthropologists’ criticisms of biocultur- alists‘ paradigms. ("ritical anthropologists argue that because of this colonial ancestry. medical anthro- pologists were unwilling (or unable) to see the ways in which their very presence was implicated in the health problems they were. seeking to resolve. This myopia was the result of failing to see the role political economy played in the formation of both colonial and epitlemiological landsce-tpes. l\loreover. critical medical anthropolo- gists made clear that l)ioculturalists' attaclnnent to evolution and adaptation “have tended to treat pcwerty. umlernottrishment. and disease as enviromnental insults to which humans must adjust" (Baer. 1996. 4J2). As Singer (1993) explains, ideas of inadequate coping or disordered adaptation might, be regarded ‘24 as the latest incarnations of a blame-tlie-victim schema in which respon- sibility for illness is implicitly assigned to the person whose health has been damaged by acculttu'ation or by repeated exposure to events beyond personal control (Singer. 1993. 18(5). [Moreoy'eri The shortcoming of adaptationism is the tendency to separate organism from environment by treating them respectively as the depen- dent and independent variables of a causal relationship. This is precisely the thinking that underlies efforts to read illness among the poor as an expression of maladzmtation while ignoring the social forces that have contributed to their conditions of living (Singer. 1993. 190). This separation of organism vs. person is fumlamental within critical medical anthro- pologist criticisms of bioculturalism. This separation makes possible the abstraction of people's disease explanatory models from the “physiological facts” of biomedicine. Through this separation "physiological facts" are seen as the basic elements of reality while pt’rople‘s views are trez—tted as simple beliefs (Good. 1994a. 5). Critical medical anthropologists argue that this scit-‘ntific view of disease obscures more than reveals, because it. t'nystifies the underlying causes of (118632180. namely. unequal and exploitative socio econtnnic relations. Critical nnrdical antln'opologists argue not. only for paying attention to politico—econmnic ftn'ces but also for a corice})tualization of science as yet another cultural system. Ant hors such as Singer propose an understanding of science as a human activity that: is not so alienated from the world of human practice as to produce an al’5solute truth. absolute facts. or an absolute confidence in itself. Their theory of truth is not, one of ct)rresp(‘mdence—— facts simply match the way the world is— but rather a pragnmtic one that ccmsiders the measure of truth to be in its use. It is in fact a false dichotcnny between knowledge and activity that has created the spectre of unconditimlal and disembodied knowledge (Singer. 1993. 186.1.1ndcrlining mine). [0 Cf! Feminists theoreticians (liar-away. 1991a: Haraway. 1991b; Harding. 1991; Harding. 1998: Scheper-llnghes. 2(101: Shiva. 1989) have been at the fm‘efront confronting this part icularly Western conceptitm of scientific practice as outside of culture and disem- bodied. Morgan notes that critical medical antln'opologists “'delil‘mrately challenge the myth of scientific objectivity and lack of accountability and argue that. researcl‘iers should S(-‘lf—(‘()115(‘l()llsly acknowledge their roles in a field of power” (h‘lorgan. 1993. 201)). As a result of critical medical ant.hropologists’ criticisms. biocultnralists such as Leatherman et. al. (1993) recognized. that. although they. have prodtu-ed critical inftn‘matitm for detailing the biological consequences of poverty and inequality in lmman populations. [they] have generally failed to interpret these finding within the political and. economic con- texts of marginality (Leatherman and Thomas. 1993. 204). Hence. new theoretical directions emerged within bioculturalism. Leatherman et al. identifies at least three of those. The first is Political Economy of Health that seeks to start the emalysis frtnn macro political economic forces. \Vith their abilities to prt'ivide detailed information on the l.)i()l(5gi(jal con— seqnmices of inequality and related processes. the inclusion of tnore work from biological anthropologists should strengthen this approach (Leather- tnan and Thomas. 1993. 295). The second is Dialectical Adaptation. which takes into consideration that the e1ivironment includes the social and cultural milieus. as well as the biophysical environment (2] the t_-oiiipoiie11t parts of the etwiromnent have no ontological priority. Rather. they take meaning from the whole: parts and wlmles are i11t.t_.\.rpenet.rated (l..("atherman and Thomas. 1993. 205). The attention is on "cost of adaptation and conflict. and contradiction as entry points of the study of change" (Let-itherman and Thomas. 1993. 205). Finally Critical Bio- logical Ant lu'opology is characterized by researchers being more self-reflexive of their entanglements within specific fields of power. As Morgan proposes. “all bioculttu'al anthropologists should make clear their agendas. in part by locating researchers’ as well as subjects~ in the research process” (Morgan. 1993. 205). 1.2.3 Critical hrledical Anthropology ('ritical medical anthropology emerged out. of the necessity to understand the role political economy played in the uneven distribution of disease along class. gender and ethnic lines. Singer (1950) argues that. Following in the analytic tradition initiated by Virchow and Engels. criti- cal medical anthropology maintains that discussion of specific health prob- lems apart. from macrolevel rmlitical and economic issues only serves to mystify social relationships that underlie environmental. occupational. nu- trit ional. residential. and experiential conditions (Singer. 1986. 129). hot“ (".\I( '. market economy and biomedicine are two of the most prominent mystifying institutions ctmtemporarily. Market. economy mystifies because it assumes the exis- tence of symmetrical economic relatitmships between equally standing nation-states. Historically. though. Northern countries have benefited the most from what in reality are unequal international economic transactions. The negative consequences of these relationships surpass mere NCJP calculations and often are felt by the most vulner- able groups within "developing countries": pzn'ticularly through public health crises. Biomedicine mystifies because it tries to resolve these public health crises through an atomistic umlerstanding of disease that overlook these larger structm'al forces. The .\larxists roots of this paradigm are obvious. ()ne of the most. important con- tributions of Karl Marx was to reveal the mystifications that are wrought normal by the objective pretensions of the dominant classes. His main point was to present *J that the categories ntn‘mally used by economists to explain and justify market rela- tions were just another tool of the dominant. classes— by means of metamorphosing a historically situated productive relatimr (ct-tpitalism) into a universal law of human (it‘\'(‘l()1’)lllt‘fll. As .\larx explains. "the economic forms in which men produce. cou- sume and exchange. are transitory and historical" (.\Iarx et al.. 1978. 138). Critical medical anthropologists apply this same analytical logic to biomedicine and science. it is no chance that market economy and biomedicine are identified as important contentporary mystifying institutions. As critical medical anthropologists explain. a central arena of analysis within critical medical anthropology is the nature and organization of the health care system that diffused hand—in- glove with capitalism the important point, of (,lepz-irture for critical medical anthropology is recognition of the relationship of this medical system to its encompassing political economic enviromncnt... [. . .] The term bourgeois medicine identifies a key feature of this health care system. namely its role in the promotion of the hegemony of capitalist society gent-arally and the capitalist class specifically (Singer. 1980. 129.underlining urine) . C'ritical _\ledical anthropologists argue that not only do biomedical services become a commodity but that biomedicine itself. as an institution. produces. reproduces and legit imizes the interests and views of capitalists. It is argued that the medical system. along with other institutions. produces disciplined subjects that would: “work ill right. all by themselves"~ (Althusser. 1971. 181). would never question the logic of capital accumulation. and would docilely accept their subjection as the natural state of things. The disciplined body of the “patient” (or the "criminal.” or the "'mad") is consti- tuted through technologies of the body that. as Foucault (1980) explains. constructs a subject through knowletlge/power relations and through the micropolitics of medi- cal [.n'actice. That. is the everyday institutitmal “regulation. surveillance and control of bodies (individual and collective) in reproduction and sexuality. work. leisure and sickness" (Lock and Sheper—Hughes. 1996. 4:3). The objeti-tificatitm of the person (the 28 "patient" ) is only achieved by an enormously systematic discipline that ultimately inscribed in the body that which perpetuated its subjection as subordinate. This con— stitution of subjects occurred through what, Althusser (1971) called the ititerpellation process. which is basically the discursive and nutterial process by which individuals are socialized within specific class roles and worldviews. This way. the “fabulation” of reality takes place (Taussig. 1980). As Taussig explains. “symptoms of disease. as much as the teclmtiilogy of healing. are. not "things—iii—themselves.” but are. . . signs of social relations disguised as natural things. concealing their roots” (Taussig. 1980). In any society. the relationship between doctor and patient is more than a technical one. It is very much a social interaction which can reinforce the cultures basic premises in a most powerful matmer. The sick person is a dependent and anxious person. malleable in the hands of the doc- tor and the health system. and open to their manipulation and moralisin . . . This gives the doctor a powerful point of entry into the patient’s psy- che. and also amounts to a estructuration of the patients’s conventional understantlings and social personality (Taussig. 1980. 4). People come to understand their innnediate socio-cultural context. their position in it (class). and their health problems as stnnething natural that has always been and always will be. This becomes socially acceptable. As Althusser explains. “Ideol- ogy subjects' us in [the sense of] coast/"tuft,rag our snbjecfruity by persuading as into mtravail/zine (1n oppress/"Ire fate" (Eagleton. 1994. 14. emphasis mine). But this so- cially acceptable worldview is only possible because we internalize the structural order within our flesh. within our bones. in our daily life. In the words of Singer (1980) critical medical anthropology. undt-‘rstauds health issues in light of the larger political and economic forces that pattern human relationships. shape social behavior. and con- dit ion collective experience. including forces of institutional. national. and global scale (Singer. 1986. 128). Echoing .\larx‘s (1960) dictum in the German Ideology. Singer (1995) argues that critical medical anthropology aims not simply to understand and describe biomedicine as a mystifying institution. "but to change culturally inappropriate. oppressive. and exploitative patterns in the health arena and beyond” (Singer. 1995. 81). For critical medical anthropologists (\V'aitzkin. 1981: Singer. 1986) disease is. not the straightforward outcome of an infectious agent or pathophysio- logic dist urlmnce. lustead. a variety of problems— including malnutrition. economic insecurity. occupational risks. bad housing. and lack of political power— create and underlying predisposition to disease and death (Singer. 1986. 129). 1.2.4 Critical Medical Anthropology: Theoretical Limitations As we have seen. critical medical anthropology does not differ from traditional politi- cal economy or PEMA in its interest. in “studying the effects of capitalist penetration.” in other words. "the impact of external forces. and the ways in which societies change or evolve largely in z1(lt‘tpiilii()11 to such impact” (Ortner. 1994. 386). A shortcoming of this approach. as (flh'tner has pointed out. about, political economy. is that history is "trmtted as something that arrives. like a ship. from outside the society in question. Thus we do not get the history of that. society. but the impact of (our) history on that society" (Ortner. 1994. 387). By paying greater attentitm to larger politico economic processes critical medical anthropology loses touch with: peoples” experiences of such processes in ways other than subjugating. people as actors and agents of their own histories and. the ways in which larger political structures are also shaped from the bottom-up by people acting against. such subjugating forces. Critical medict-il anthropology even when it dectnistructs biomedicine as cultural sys- tems that imtintain. reinforce and reproduce political systems of inequality. maintains a materialist ontology that tends to (wereniphasize the economic over the experien- .30 tial. This economic determinism tends— particularly in Singers (1993: 1986: 1992) and .\forsy's (1996) characterization of critical medical anthropology— to depict. ca- pitalism as homogenous. unchanging and teleological. Because it. has been so critical of bioculttn'alism. critical medical anthropology has failed to include an ecological turderstanding within their analysis. As a few authors have recently recognized. an integration of ecological and envirt)nmental concerns within critical medical anthro- pology is long overdue (Baer. 1996: Ferguson. 1997; Kalipeni and Oppong. 1998). Although critical medical anthropolt)gists use of Foucault’s insights on the constitu- tion of sttbjt-w-tivities through knowletlge/power regulating practices is fundamental: it does not leave room for human agency and it treats the body exclusively as the basic medium for people's subjection. This uncritical use of Fmtcault’s insights is pro- blematic because it forgets human agencies. energies and desires. As Ong explains. Foucault notes that in social regulation. subtle coercion takes hold upon the body at the levels of movements. gestures and attitudes but he barely expltn'es how the subjects of regulation themselves draw the medical gaze in the first place. nor how their resistances to biomedical intervention both invite and deflect control. . . Thus the biomedical gaze is not such a. diffused hegemonic power bttt is itself generated by the complex contestation of ..subjects pursuing their own goals and needs (Ong. 199.5. 1244). Everything cannot be reduced to the overt-itching pmver of discourse. for where dis- course ends the body begins. People‘s corptn'eality is not only the canvas upon which discursive inscriptions get materialize and hence the site where. subjection most effec- tively works but also the site of resistance and agency. As Lock and Sheper-Hughes explains. Sickness. ..is a form of conmmnication— the language of the organs— through which nature. society. and culture speak sinutlt.aneously. The individual body should be seen as the most immediate. the proximate ter— rain where social truths and social contradiction are played out. as well 31 as a locus of personal and social resistance. creativity. and struggle (Lock and Sheper-Hughes. 1996. 70). As opposed to critical medical anthropologists who conceptualize the “organic body” as sinnehow emptied of sociality (a passive canvas of subjection) this approach needs an understanding of the body as the source of agency and identity: a notion of "embodied perstmhood." As Lock and Sheper—Hughes have. pointed out. the body has emerged as "the primary action zone of the late twentieth century” (Lock and Sheper-llughes. .1996. 42). 1.2.5 Interpretative vs. Critical Medical Anthropology To overcome C.\l.~\ theoretical limitaticms we need to pay attention to the ways in which macro/st.ructural processes are factored in within micro/ social interactions but without. loosing sight of people‘s experiences and their creative ways of negotiating and coping with rapid changes in their health and landscapes. In this respect. an interpretative approach such as the phenoment>logical one propose by Byron Good is long overdue (Good. 1994b: Good. 1994c). As an alternative to materialist ap- proaches we need to look at. the imptn'tant ways in which the experience and meaning of illness constitutes the life worlds of people confronting disease. Good (1994b) proposes a. phentnuenology of illness experiences to understand the ways in which illness narratives and "rituals" reconstruct the world that suffering has unmade by "subjunctivizing reality" in the regenerative act. of engulfing reality from the sentient position of the body (Good. 1994b. xiii). \V'e need to understand how the. medical system by its atomistic way of dealing with illness systematically breaks with the. body as a mediator (through the senses) with the non—lmman world. This way. people‘s bodies and their knowledge of it are negated. The "reification stemming from the commodity-structure” in which the medical sys— tem works— based on a Cartesian worldview of universal truths— tell people. “Don’t trust your senses. Don’t trust. the feeling of uncertainty and ambiguity” (Taussig. 1980. :3). The particular connectitms of how a situation of inequality has been pro- 32 duced are hidden by an atomistic perception of reality. The medical system by ne- gating the validity of people's senses achieved the alienation of people from the pos- sibility of making the phenoment)logical connections present everywhere. yet which are conceal front their eyes. This is the power of normalizing institution that is to constitute specilic types of subjectivities along particular social projects. These social projects gravitate around issues of control. access and distribution over resources. But. subjectivity is not. constituted solely within powerful normalizing institutions. such as hospitals. schools or churches. It. also emerges out everyday life engagements of people among themselves. with their environments and. with transnational discourses. l argue that these other aspects of the constitutitm of identity play a greater role when normalizing institutions fail to address people’s experiences and issues. We cannot just look at how an instittttion imposes meaning on people but also need to look at how people themselves generate meaning by circulating discourses in relation to their experiences. Discourses do not. stem only from localized institutions. but increasingly are the result of transnational Hows. Transnational discourses on health. environment aml human rights then provide an alternative de-territorialized repertoire of ideas from which to draw on when previous systems of meaning fall short. to make sense of people’s oppressive reality (Appadurai. 1996: Wilson. 1997a). in contexts of environmental and health crises. the legitimacy of normalizing insti- tutions is called into question because their discourses and practices become incom- patible. with people’s tmtlerste-mdings of such issues. This incompatibility opens up spaces in which inscriptions other than the institutional ones acquire greater rele- vance in people's t-trticulz‘ttion of their own subject positions. This is not to say that institutional discourses and materials (such as biomedical ones) stop 1_)laying a role within the constitutitm of identities. Instead that such materials are more freely ap- propriated. modified and negotiated to suit people's attenmts to make sense of both an altered environment and an altered self. Drawing from a sub—field within medical anthropology that follows an int.er}.)r(-3t.ative framework— and which has been criticized by CMA for over emphasizing peoples 33 individual experiences. at the expense of political economic considerz‘rtions— I argue that the experience of illness is key in the transft)rniatioiis of snbjectivities. ;\'It')reo\«'er. by examining the relationship between illness and identity in contexts of environmen- tal degradation my research will contribute to the literature on new social movements, political ecology. and .I.ll(-,‘(ll("dl anthropology. especially since that literature has seldom explored such connectitms. Illness not only challenges petane's it’lentity but. also clit‘tllenges the very legitimacy of their world: it touches every aspect of the human experience by virtue of disrupting people's everyday lives. Similar to Elaine Sci-irry‘s (1085) description of pain. illness has the power to umnake people‘s world in the most proftmnd way. And yet. people struggle to remake a. coherent lifeworld out of the world um‘nade by suffering and disease. Illness and the threat. of it. deeply affects not only the experiential world of the suf- ferer but, also the lives of the family. intimate friends and co-workers (Kleinman et al.. 1002). In this sense. illness and people's experiences of it are fundamentally inter- subjective. That. is the. process of 111aking sense of illness takes places as a collective endeavor of building a livable world. As people “narratively connect the cause and effects of their illness . . . to their ongoing lives, they effectively convert the liminality of [disease] into a social resource. In a fascinating process of inversion carried out through narrative. weakness bectimies power" (Hunt. 2000. 99—100). And yet to only talk about the ways in which the experience of illness is part of people's re-art iculation of their subjectivity is to miss how other-t.l'ian-human actors are part of this process as well. In other words. how the “coming—into-being” of dwellers embodied selves. whether they want it or not, is metamorphosized along with the “comirig—into-being" of a polluted enviromncnt, in which often times they did not assist in creating (lngold. 2000). This is particularly true of the creation of militarized landscapes that are t.ransftn‘ined by the uin'estricted release of extremely hazardous substances into the environment. 1.3 Political Ecology of Disease: A New Synthesis Until recently. within critical medical anthropology. the idea of integrating political ecology int o the understanding of disease etiology and perception has not. been an area of great interest. Some authors have recognized that with few exceptions. medical anthroj)ology and sibling (‘lisciplines have not. seriously explored the ways in which political ecology can contribute to the analysis of disease. mortality and health (Baer, 1996: Ferguson. 1997: Kalipeni and Oppong. 1998; Mayer. 2000). Ferguson (1997) explains that the belated arrival of political ecology to medical anthropology. despite the ascendance of envirtmnrental crises, has to be understood against the backdrop of neo-L\lalthusian. evolutionary. and systems-oriented theories which monopolized the ecological prism within medical anthropology (Ferguson, 1997. 2). The fact that none of t ltcse a pproaches incm'porate the .\[arxist insights of political economy. dependency or systems theories kept many critical medical antliropologists “away from considering ecological factors" (Ferguson. 1997. 2) Recently. though. an interest has sparked within medical anthropology that seems to be promising. As Baer (1990) explains. although political ecology has arrived belatedly to the field there is evidence of a. growing interest within medical anthropology to “recognize the significance of polit.ical—economic factors in the etiology of disease” (Baer, 1996. 451). An example of this growing interest within met‘lical antl‘iropology was the panel orga- nized in 1990 at the annual meeting of the American Anthropology Association titled "A Dialogue between Critical Medical Anthropology and Bioculturalism: Toward a Political Ecology of Health” (Baer, 1996. 451). As the articles of this panel showed (Baer. 1996: Gruenbanm. 1996; Leatherman. 1996; htlcElroy, 1996), there is now a new (ii-("thigne / debate between biocultural and critical medical anthropologists. This debate stems. as we have seen. from the fact that. biocultural antln‘opologists have paid great attention to ecological and social relatitiins to understt-nid disease. mor- tality and health. but they have for the most. part done so without. looking carefully at ptflitical-econt)mic factors. C'ritical medical anthropologists have paid attention to political economy but they have done so at the expense of ecological considerations (Baer. 1990. 4:32). This could be further explained in part by the fact that. traditional political economy. with its narrow interest on unequal econmnic exchanges. paid little attention to environmental factors. This ecological myopia within political economy. in turn. explains the emergence of political ecology as an alternative approach— par- ticularly among tieo-‘.\larxists. Neo—L\Iarxists. in turn. have for the most. part. neglected paid the nexus between environmental crises and health crises. But this emerging interest in integrating political ecology with the understanding of health and disease issues has not, been limited to medical antlu'cniology. In a sibling discipline. geography. .\layer (2000) similarly has attempted to apply the insights of political ecology to the understanding of epiclemiological changes. He calls his attempt ”political ecology of disease." Like his counter parts within medical anthro- pology. .\layer recognizes this as "a promising if as yet 111Ml(,‘1‘(l0\'(‘l()1)(-?(l approach to understand disease dynamics" .\Iayer (Mayer. 2000. 948). Mayer defines this ap- proach as emphasizing "the unintended human and natural consequences of indi- vidual. corporate and governniental projects. and (’lemonstrates aptly that disease has its human—made components as well as its natural components” (Mayer, 2000. 918). .\layer explains that applying political ecology’s insights to specific diseases and I)(")[)lllttll()ll.\'. "can alter the concepts of the causality of disease from a. purely biomedical concept to one that also incorporates the unintended aspects of lunnan action" (Mayer. 2000. 949). Indeed. the meaning of disease causat ion changes when considering it in social and ecological contexts. The germ theory of disease and the doctrine of specific etiology concentrated much attention on the smaller scale. microscopic and sul>microscopic scales of disease. Yet. causation can also be expanded to larger scales . . . by so doing adds to our understanding of disease causation (Mayer. 2000. 938). Like many of the authors previously reviewed. Ferguson (1997) agrees that the im- plications of altered environments for health “remains little investigated by critical mediczstl anthropologists” (Ferguson. 1997. 5) This is indeed a limitation for critical 36 medical anthropologists since "many environmental resources like wild and domes- ticated plants. land. water and air are also critical and contested health resources” (Ferguson. 1997. :3). Moreover. new social movements. especially those organized around environnrental justice concerns are also health movements. although they are not usually regarded as such in medical anthropology (Ferguson, 1997. 6). I will add that by the same token. the literature on new social movements have completely overlooked what I will call the liealth/identity nexus as a pivotal element on the fornn’ition of such movements. In the few cases within political ecology in which health and disease have been ex- plored (Kalipcni and Oppong. 1998: Mayer. 2000; Pedersen. 1996). it. has been done from a primarily biomedical perspective. As Ferguson (1997) explains. Health and illness are often defined in purely biomedical terms with no place for the social construction of illness and no valuing of alternative medical systems. practices or experiences (Ferguson. 1997. (i). This is the case with the authors reviewed in this chaptm' who are. all trying to integrate political ecology with health. with the exception of Ferguson (1997). Slieper- Hughes (1992). and Harper (2002). As Ferguson (1997) explains. the shortcoming of some authors applying a political ecology approach to health and disease concerns is that they privilege "biomedicine as the only tnedical reality and fails to analyze its social construction and practices or its role in social control” and in doing so they denied "the reality and value of alternative concepts of health and illness that many people hold" (f‘ict‘guson. 1997. 7). By incorporating the strengths of political ecology and critical and i11t.er1')ret.at.ive medical anthropology into a Political Ecology of Disease. we can perhaps destabilize the ontological center. A shift in analytical standpoint. a move from the center to the margins. might enable “us" to envision possibilities for the future. .37 In my research 1 intend to contribute to a Political Ecology of Disease using the body as an analytical trope that helps understand the nexus of liealth/environment/ideiitity that is fundannrntal to the emergence of new social moven‘ients. This will allow me to address the flaws of some of the approaches discussed. which paid little attention to human ex1')erience and perception. Even within the literattu‘e that has paid attention to the connection between environmental degradation and social movements (envi- ronmental justice and envir<)nmental sociology). few theoretical and empirical elab- orations have been developed that make it possible to understand their emergence as processes of it'lentity formation. I hope to ctmtribute to the literatm'e by using the insights of critical medical antliroj')ology and interpretative medical anthropol— ogyg ((‘sordz-is. 1991: (iood. 1991a: Good. 1994b: Good. 1994c: Hunt. 2000; Kleinman et al.. [992: lileinman. 1992: Schel)er-Hughes. 1992). aiming at understanding the disrupting effect s of illness on people‘s notions of self within context of environmental degradation. Yet 1 remain aware of the dangers of such interpretative frameworks: often they form text ualistic approz-tclnes in which the constitution of subjects happens exclusively at the discursive level. This renders the body as a passive entity upon which discursive inscriptions get "materialized." Echoing C'sordas (1994: 1988). 1 ar- gue for "consideration of the body as a. generative source of culture rather than as a. (elm/u, 'I'usu, upon which cultural meaning is inscribed” (Csordas. 1994, 17,underline mine). In this sense. the constitution of subjectivity. far from being understood as exclusively taking place through discourse. emerges from a historically situated body entangled in complex social. economical. political and enviromnental relations. 111 my research. consciousness cannot be separated from the experiential body be- cause it is in the body that environmental contradictions get. expressed and from the body that any awareness of. and action against. such contrz—nlictions might emerge. 1 propose the body— always entangled in definite ways of l)eing—in-the—world— as a 2.‘\(,'('()1'(llllg to some authors (Baer 1997. C‘scn'das 1988. Frankenberg 1988) critical medical an- thropology is further divided between the ones with a focus on political economy and the ones with a focus on interpretative or constructivist approaches. Hence. I see my contribution to a political ecology of health as incorporating these interpretative or poststructuralist analytical frameworks. since it is onlv through them that we can reach people's experiences to understand the limitations of biomedicine. science and technology. For a review of these debates and similar plea on the integration of these approaches to critical medical anthropology and see Baer (1997'). 38 trope. through which to understand the socio/politic-a1 implications of current rapidly changing enviromnents. 1 base this proposition on the simple fact that in the face of polluted environments the body becomes the ultimate register of epidemiologi- cal changes by becoming "sick." In other words. the coming—into-l)eing of the world becomes central in the. coming-into-being of people‘s selves and well-being. Hence. if in contexts saturated with hazardous substances people’s etiological explamations depart from that suggested by traditionally atomistic l‘)iom(_>dical accounts, it is be— cause of the difference in. their positioning in relation to the "conting—into—being" of industrialized and/or militzn'ized landscaj')es. A synthesis of these analytical insights into a Political Ecology of Disease has the potential to show how the increasing emergence of new social movements can be the marginal standpoint from which the hegemony of science, technology and biomedicine can be challenged. This challenge does not come from the master narratives of science (whether natural or social). but instead from the language of action of an increasingly more active civil society. "Our” (-lisciplinary search for criticisms and solutions to environnrental. social. and health crises have perhaps been. misplaced all this time. Now is the time for "us" to change “our” monocular lens to a, kaleidoscopic View of 1‘)eopleis struggles. 3 9 Chapter 2 Where, How and Why? 2.0.1 Research Site Puerto ll ico is not only the place where 1 was born. but also the place where I ended 11p ctmducting the dissertation research yott are now reading. My dissertation. however. did not start there. In its inception it started between the cold winters of East Lansing. Michigan. while working on my graduate studies, and the hot summers of Queretaro in Central Mexico. while conducting pre-dissertaiton research. about eight years ago. The 1'8. invasion of Puerto Rico in 18.98 —and the colonial status that since has shaped Puerto Ricans" everyday life— also place a role in this dissertation. It. is not. an accident. that, despite the (:lifficulty of coming to the US. to pursue my doctoral studies. it. was still easier to come and study here —-because of access to federal loans and not having to get. visas to pass U.S. customs— than doing it in any other neighboring country. Puerto Ricans after all are U.S. citizens since 1917 when the 11.8.. some say granted while others say imposed. this citizenship upon us. The "honor” of becoming US. citizens for Puerto Ricans happened at the same time US. involvement in \\'orld \Var l solidified. It is no accident then that the US. has since drafted thousands of l’uerto Ricans into military service. Despite their citizenship and having to serve in the military. Puerto Ricans living on the island cannot vote in US. elections — this did not. change even when in 1952 Puerto Rico was declared (‘onnnt)nwealth in “association” with the US. thus allowing self goverment in matters of local politics. Now that the obligatory draft. is over. US. 40 citizenship still secures for the US. Army a. handsome poll of recruits in the poorest neighborhoods‘ high schools. If the anti-\r"ietnam W’ar movement during the seventies brought an end to obligatory draft. it. also brought the knowledge that advertising and structural economic pressures were more efficient mechanisms to litre the poor to joining the forces. I know it fttll well because the US. artny ahnost recruited me twice. first in high school and later in college. ()ne of my older l’)rothers did join the forces: a decision that sadly brought him not. only disease. when his kidney failed while in service. but his eventual demise when his body could no longer take dialysis. Wit It few economic a‘tltm'natives. joining the forces becomes a y tay for upward mobility for the poor. I am weaving these historical events with my own biography because to a great. degree this is the experience of Puerto Ricans at large and of Vieq'trenses in particular. For instance. civilian veterans in Vieques account for eight percent of the total populationon the island. The end of the Hispanic American War in 1898. the US. invasion, the granted citizenship in 1917, the military service draft. the declaration of the Commonwealth in 1952. are some of the historical events that explain how Puerto Rico’s landscape and the very experience of being Puerto Rican have been shaped within the context of the. geopolitical (:levelopment of the US. as an emerging power in the \\"estern Hemisphere. As we can see in Figure 2.1. Puerto Rico. with a population of 3.950 million. is the smallest. and the most eastert‘i of the Greater Antilles — the other three largest islands of the Antilles are Cuba. Hispaniola (Haiti and Dominican Republic) and Jamaica. Puerto Rico is approximately 100 miles from east to west. and 35 miles from the north and south. which is about. 3.435 square miles (8.897 km2). In addition to the tnain island. the territory of Puerto Rico also includes the following smaller islands: \'ie 621.2: cm "i ""3 “ ‘ "A T, j, w [Emma acumen l $1137: (:fllh‘" my!“ I “a "” - .-. e REPUB IC g“ 8m ‘ Islet-cu Anemia (UK) G I: a brawl 0“. _:-fl 3 Juan . ; s: flam‘rié MM ‘ /‘ Penna. 3‘" ","°“o’?‘ 1325741" // l, / e a JALuiCA Klnplon ;/ , hm? ”‘19 PuERtO “'9" . 4332 i RICO m «It! I 9 Haiti 5' ions ‘ Aim. “M... I /‘ ‘ t a, i tems / .Gyhdelqlmo ’4 k, Mcnuonul \ (FR! .. Cuba ' f - o W K) . ,9...“th l I oouiNitA . A [7, U l / e '7 Moo-0*“- ,... f ‘ 7.. a --~~»»» "“t .. a“. _. .4 ...-_..._-..-.,'..«..mm.-- _ ,.-._..... .......o;—— “Villai- mpg-(’3‘ a: ‘5 “ 1‘ l’.‘ r‘ 'i.i ;..i-'.i:,i L .’ matings . l ‘ 1 fiCl-ibu - Caribbean iSea . “0““ st LUCIA i i no own' ‘ A l 51 vwcmn “ “4.1L 1% URhN/ioiuzs,‘ smaaoos y Aruba‘ Loss-.1 Ann'ios . , . I ,,.-' t .. . i “*GRFMDA . ,,. ' m,“ . Manama: . l ‘- 59"“ a .. ,_ Arman: i_ CCSTA 6.".an Ti JU‘ A 'i Calf“ " g - RICA Cam "is i ‘7. .. i L} Sln‘ . , “at" é \‘ Eamummela IT J‘Cu Jou ‘ ‘ ' »' g, \ a'aYQM'a t‘ ‘a’ " . y. WNWAWT' ~ . ‘J 1 \ . LtLLLL-‘l Figure 2.1: Map of the Caribbean. Source: http: / / geologycom / world / caribbean—mapgif 42 of Puerto Rico— refer to Figure “2.2. In order to get to Vieques you have to travel by car or public transportation to the Port-of—Eutry in the town of Fajardo where you can take the ferry to the island. Driving from San Juan to Fajz-irdo without much traffic — something very unlikely in Puerto Rico given that. there are almost. as many cars as there are people on the island — can take up to one hour and up to two and a half if it is done during peak hours or using public transportation. The ferry goes to \"ieques three times a day and the trip lasts for about two hours. \-’\"liile during the week the ferry is not too busy. on weekends it is another story. especially during the summer. and if you are not early into the port of Fajardo —and I mean two hours early— you run the risk of not boarding it. because of how busy it becomes. I know this because I did most of my research in Vieques during the stnnniers of 2001. 2002 and 20935. Puerto Rico North Arianric Ocean Isla de Mona Culebra ’ ‘\‘-~-'\_. ~TW SAN JUAN “'8 ‘lAquadilla (term .-‘3~~~’-=--«. M: de Desecmoo / Bayamon. . . -. Cw'obm (,4 Carolina ' . _- ~ ‘ Faiardo ' $65“ \\ Caguas. P213256 S,_Mayaguoz Puerto RICO /.,~-'~ 3 t 1"") 5 f w Unis", :3 C Guayariillab .Ponca G u .1me ‘j/f' mtg (VI-i I. — dial} Q 9 kp—‘rmer-fi ’_‘ I, ‘1_""" L; J ‘w'r' I . \v 3,1,9v/ - do Pcnce a ‘ ' Vieques Caribbean Sea M Figure 2.2: Map of Puerto Rico. Source: hi i [)2///',/\\’\\'\\'.llltllit,‘.&l('.lllx'/S(‘I(‘11(‘(‘S/\\’()1'l(lgllldv/lMilli/99741181).lliIlll While from a geographical point of view Puerto Rico is an island. it is more than that for View/crises. In fact. I would not dare to qualify Puerto Rico as an island while in the company of I'U’q‘llt’lkfi’S involved in collective mobilization. For them, Puerto ltico is an archipelago of which \r'ieques and other islands are part. This semantic distinction has to do with a long history in which Vieques geographical isolation has translated into political and economical u'iarginalization. Vieques. Puerto Rico. has a population of approximately 9,400 people who live in the center of the island. l"t(’(](t(”ll.b’(fb’ inhabit 22 1;)ercent of the 110 square miles while the 4 3 remaining 78 percent of the island is occupied by the US. Navy military facilities on the East and West coasts of the island. As Figure 2.3 illustrates the west part of the island is where the the US. Navy stores ammunitions, while the eastern zone is where the firing range is located and where the military practices takes place— for an artistic depiction of the firing range refer to Figure 2.6 on page 54. Land Use U.$. Naval Installations Vie ues Island, Puerto Rlco - q as Shooting Range :9 . a; S {’5’ “so Isabel Segunda m .2 ‘ m (D m 0— my...“ "a-m— Guam-bu! . m um r...- ‘K‘W 73’ i ' . ‘ 4, i . ‘ > /’ I - . . .jzi .. “ ‘ ' . -: . *7 4.31% iii/J “I,“ I... tr.“ In :Wm“ .. ‘ V 7:1 , 32'7” .— ‘ Fifi—Tat $’\/ _ L4 ‘ ' if Lunar—M w/ “" ..... ._ Coeuwwon ena Q? U- MW” La Esperanza (0 ---~ -- 1:" a...“ Q as I -O .. -: —- ~ ~- - ,1 + m L) Figure 2.3: Map of Vieques and Navy’s Military Facilities. Source: littp://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/a111ericas/vieques.navy-1999.jpg The uneven development of Vieques is best exemplified in the fact that Vieques has among the highest unemployment rate of Puerto Rico’s 78 municipalities, with a 60 percent, unemployment rate. The main areas of employment for those 1,712 employed people are detailed in Table 2.1. What becomes obvious from Table 2.1 is that almost half of the employed (46 (Io) are working the low paying service jobs, which are tied to the foreign owned tourist sector. h’Ianufacturing jobs accounts for only 6.8 % of the jobs while construction for 14.5 0/E govermnent for 12.7 “/0 and retail trade for 10.0 %— refer to Table 2.2 for detailed information on employment by industries. While fishing and agricultural activities account for only 2 % of employment (mostly self employment) subsistence agriculture and fishing are activities that able people 44 engage in to supplement their meager economies and diets. The per capita income of those who are employed is (5.502 dollars and over 64 percent of the 1.x)pulation in Vieques live below the 1,)oyerty line. Occu pat ion N umber Percent Management and professional 381 22.3 Service occupations 479 28.0 Sales and office occupations 281 16.4 lj‘arlning. fishing. and forestry 34 2.0 Construction. extraction, and maintence 314 18.3 Production and transpt)rtation 223 13.0 Table. 2.1: Employment. by ()cctumtion in Vieques Source: US. Census Bureau. Census 2000 Sumnnn'y. 111(11151'1'y N umber Percent .'~\griculttn‘e. forestry and fishing 29 1.7 Construction 249 14.5 Manufacturing 117 6.8 \\"l1olesale trade 23 1.3 ltetail trade 172 10.0 Transportation, warehousing, and utilities 91 5.3 Finance, real estate. and rental and leasing 81 4.7 Professional, scientific. administrative 136 7.9 Educational. health and social services 374 21.8 Entertainment. recreation. and food services 139 8.1 Other services (except public administration) 84 4.9 Public administration 217 12.7 Table 2.2: Employment by Industry in Vieques Source: U.S. Census Bureau. Census 2000 Sunnnary. The harsh economic reality in which the majority of Viequenses live, which is so ev- ident in numbers. often escapes the sight of those visiting the island. This happens because this reality is easily hidden behind the breathtaking beauty of this seemingly idyllic place and the lit,)spit.alit_\.' of people depending 011 tourism. The spatial distri— bution of residential areas also helps to maintain the separation between the “pristine nature" of tourism and the living quarters of those who do the cleaning in the hotels and serve the tourists their plans coltrdas. The two biggest urban areas are Isabel Segunda. on the northern coast and La. Esperanza, in the southern part of the island. though there are. smaller bmv‘iadas (neighborhoods) spread out through Vieques. Is- abel Segunda is the downtown of Vieques and is where the ferry arrives and the main business district. is found. Here you have the tradititmal layout of the Spanish colonial ttitwn with the square plaza surrounded by [a (Llculdta. (city hall) on one side and the Catholic church on the other. La Alla/nae de lit/I'ztjeres, a women’s activist group who organized around health issues is also located in Isabel Segunda. In La Esperanza, the other important. residential area. there is also a. small tourist strip along the bay where restz-un‘ants and stores are found. Close to La Esperanza. there is the bioluminescent bay and some of the most popular beaches in Vieques. In order to go to La Esperanza. you take the main road and drive south up the steep hill. This route takes you past: the medical clinic, which used to offer only secondary care often provided by nurses; Monte Carmelo a mythical conmnmity founded by squatting (or as they explained, retz—tking) fenced land that was under the US. Navy’s jurisdiction; the gates of Camp Garcia which is where the N avv’s firing range is located; and El Campamento J usticia y Paz located right. in front of Camp Garcia’s gate and from which civil disobedience was organized. The trip between Isabel Segunda and La Esperanza. is about eight miles long through what I remember being a. very narrow. curvy and hilly main road: during the time I was conducting research my only transportation was a bike that my nephew lent me. The first sunnner (2001) I went. to V iequcs to conduct my research I lived in Monte Carmelo. Like most. of the houses in this squatting community (around 300 houses) there was no electricity, running water or paved streets and the majority of the houses were built. out of whatever materials were available. As Monte Carmelo’s name im- plies, the location of this cormnunity was on a mountain, and a very steep one, which made. vehicle access impossible. Walking up or down its hills was not easy either and it would take me around a good thirty minutes to go from the top of the moun- tain. where I was staying. to the main road that connected Isabel Segunda and La Esperanza: going up the. hill used to take me even longer. For about three months I experienced the hardships that these remarkable I/"tieqnenses experience in their everyday lives. 46 For the other summers I ended up renting a room in La ES}_)eraza. While that made my living situation a. little more manageable. not having to struggle with the conditions of Monte Carmelo. it made it harder to attend the important activists’ meetings that. would take place in El Campamento Justicia y Paz and in (.lifferent. places in Isabel Segunda. During this time was the period that. I biked the most under the hot summer sunshine to attend the different. activities and to conduct my interviews. One thing that did not. change by moving to La Esperanza. however. was the main staples of my diet: canned tuna and bread. In what follows I will include my field notes from those very first few days of my research. because I think that they capture not only my naivete but also the tense atmosphere of a place engulfed by an e11viromnental and health crisis. Tuesday July 2-1. 2001 My early departm'e in the morning. 4:00 am, and the rhythmic movement of the waves kept me in a lethargic state for most of the time on the ferry. I am not sure if it was because I felt. so tired, because of my intellectual idleness after being with family. or simply because of research “cold feet,” but I was unable to speak to anybody for most of the trip. W' hat an art— t'ln'opologistl My first “contact” was the complicit look of a person sitting close by. which. like me. overheard and did not agree with somebody’s pro—Navy statements.1 I had other reasons to be worried besides my sudden shyness; among them were not knowing where to stay once in \r’it‘»‘('jties and not having any formal contact with activists—despite some phone calls I had managed to make before my arrival. In the ferry there were many people and all I could think was how to start some. casual cmiversation with somebody to feel that. I was finally starting my fieldwork. I looked around and I could not decide whom to approach until I saw this eighty-year old grandma holding 1While the majority of 1"‘zicquenscs wanted the retreat of the. Navy from the island, there were still people whom for various reasons wanted the Navy to stay. People in favor of leaving the Navy in Vieques were called pro-marina or pro-navy people. a flagpole with a Puerto Rican flag bigger than her. The fragility of her figure in stark contrast with her defiant gesture was truly puzzling. To my surprise I later learned that the enchanting grandma was not eighty years old as I thought but ninety-tln'ee. However the age of Dona Isabelita Rosado was not the real source of my surprise. instead who she was. Dur- ing the turbulent. and repressive nineteen—fifties the Partido Nacionalista, lead by Don Pedro Albizu Campos, was the spearhead of the national liberation movement in Puerto Rico against the US. colonial regime. As part of this struggle the Blair House was attacked and numerous mem- bers of the party ended up in jail. The Partido Nacionalista’s attack of the Blair House in \Vashington DC. was an attempt to raise to international attention Puerto Rico’s colonial situation. Dona Isabelita was the secre- tary of the Partido Nacionalista and because of her political involvement she was imprisoned for more than 16 years. As the gesture of the flag and later events showed me. her time as a. political prisoner did not change her political ideas. Little did I know of the surprises awaiting for me. that day as a conse- quence of approaching these fascimiting characters. After two long hours of regretting my quietness. the ferry finally arrived to Vieques and while seeing everybody getting ready to leave I realized that that was probably my last chance to get to know them, so I gathered some courage and I aj’)proache(;l them. They were very kind and seemed to enjoy my hard to hide admiration for Dona Isabelita. Our conversation continued while disembarking and as a result I got to meet the person picking them up in the harbor: Roberto Robin, one of the activists with whom I talked to by phone and that I was hoping to interview once on the island. I lCttl‘llt-Kfl from the quick introduction the reason of their presence in Vieques. The day of our arrival was the day of the conn'nemoration of Simon Bolivz-tr's birtht‘lay. Dona Isabelita was the guest speaker at this evmit. I was immediately invited to the activity and since I did not have 48 prior plans I happily accepted their int-'itat'ion. Later I learned that Si- mon Bolivar visited \I’ieques on one of his trips. The activity took place in [a plaza. central in front of Bolivar’s statue— donated by the Venezuelan government. some years ago. In retrospect. being able to meet key actors of the activist network. which would have probably taken me months to do. literally took me only a few hours. not because of my “incredible anthropological” talents, but l')ecause of simple chance. I met. the right, people at the right time. At the commemoration I was introduced yet to more people which where deeply involved in the civil disobedience movement in Vieques. The gath- ering of people. no more than 30, started the activity by singing the revo- lutionary version of La Borinquena.2 In the years of La 'InO'rdaza (the gag 2Arise. Pumto Rican! \ the call to arms has sounded! \ Awake from this dream. \ it is time to light! DUGSlllt [lllb’ )i—ltl'lOi’lC call SPI. V'Olll' llOfiI'I- Elllfi’llt? (301119.! \‘VQ are III tune \Vlth the I’O‘dl‘ Of the . n Ctllllltnl. Come. the Cuban \ will soon be free: \ the machete will give \ him his liberty... \ the machete will give \ him his liberty. Now the war drum \ says with its sound. \ that the jungle is the place \ of the meeting. of the meeting... \ of the meeting. The Cry of Lares \ must be repeated. \ and then we will know: \ victory or death. Beautiful Puerto Rico \ nuist follow Cuba: \ you have brave sons \ who wish to fight. Now. no longer can we be. unmoved: \ now we do not want timidly \ to let them subjugate us. We want. \ to be free. now. \ and our machete \ has been sharpened... \ and our machete \ has been sharpened. \ \Vhy then have we been \ so sleepy and (leaf \ and deaf to the call? There is no need to fear. Pnei‘to Ricans. \ the roar of the cannon: \ saving the nation \ is the duty of the heart. We no longer want despots, \ tyranny shall fall now; \ the unconquerable women \ also will know how to light. \Ve want \ liberty. \ and our machetes \ will give it to us... \ and our machete \ will give it to us. Come. Puerto Ricans. \ come now. \ since fl'OOdOl’ll awaits us anxiously. \ anxiously freedom. \ freedom! freedom! 49 law) (hiring the fifties, the lyrics of the song calling for armed struggle 1'3") '3 ' "le " 1 ‘ l. . 1 Y "‘ k '1‘ 1‘ :3 f) I 1— wcic. ccnsurcc an( a non/p0 itica xeision too its p ace , yet t 1e su) versive words were never forgotten and when pronounced their symbolic power emerged interpellating a nationalist Puerto Rican subject. I felt hailed by the. power of such words and shortly after tl'iey started singing I did too. I have to say that l was somehow troubled because while I am a Puerto Rican more than sympathetic towards independenttsta ideals my presence there was primarily as a. researcher. At the commemoration, totally unexpected to me as were the rest of things that. took place that day. I met my most keen collaborator. activist and friend: Miguel. In his sixties, Villa ——which is how people call him —-has a long history of activism on his shoulders. As an example, his nickname came from a squatter settlement called Villa. Sin Miedo (or The Fearless \Ifillage) that during the seventies kept the police in “check mate” the police for a couple of years. Puerto Rico. as many other Latin American countries has a long history of disposed people struggling to obtain a place to live. Villa was the spokesperson of Villa 5m M redo and in the numerous occasions that police tried to evict them he led with others confrontations which at times included bullet exchz‘mges. Popular movements in Puerto Rico. during the sexl'enties where brutally suppressed, especially during the react.ionary Romero Barcelds administration under which open violence Lyrics: Lola Rodriguez dc Tio (1868); Translation: Sanmel Quiros; Source: httpz//wti‘lcomc.topiit2rtorico.org/l)ori.shtml “The land of Borinquen \\ where I have been born.\ It is a florid garden \ of magical brilliance. A sky always clean \ serves as 'd,('tl.11()1')}'. \ And placid lullabies are given \ by the waves at her feet. When at. her beaches Columbus arrived. \ he exclaimed full of admiration: \ Oh! Oh! Oh! \ This is the beautiful land, that I seek. It is Borinquen the daughter. \ the daughter of the sea and the sun. \ of the sea and the sun, \ of the sea and the sun. \ of the sea and the sun. \ of the sea and the sun! \ Lyrics: Minutel Fernandez .Iuncos (1846—1928); Translation: Samuel Quiros: Source: http:// welcomwtoprlt‘l‘tol‘icoxn‘g/ against students and indcpemle'I’it'zist(is was the order of the day.4 Villas’ involvement in the civil disobedience movement in Vieques started two years ago when he decide to move to Vieques in order to participate in the movement. Villa expended, with other hundreds of people, a whole year living in what until that moment were the areas of military practice. The camps established in these terrains were the ones that made the US. Navy stop their military practices for that year. From approaching the group in the ferry, going to the commemoration, and being introduced to key people of the movement I was also invited to go with them (Dona Isabelita and the other two persons accompanying her) for lunch. At first I politely tried to refuse, because I felt that it was too much an abuse of their kindness, but their insistence made me abandon my futile attempts. I also figured that it would have been disrespectful to decline their imitation and well. yes. I was also starving. After Dona Isabelita’s sharp speech full of historical details we ended up going to a small local restaurant. After our lunch we went to the Alianza dc l\~lujeres. a group formed by women who have been organizing around issues of health in Vieques. Their office. a block away from the la plaza central, is a large room with plenty of space including a couple of work-tables full of educational literature ready to be (:listrilnited. From what I picked up over lunch, the Alianza de l\*Iu_jeres is also responsible for orchestrating rallies, protests, marches and even press conferences. Miguel introduced me to the director of the Alianza de. :\=Iujeres. .Iudith Conde. of whom I had heard so much and who I was hoping to interview as well. .\7 ext to this office, from which the current. referendum ‘anipaign has been taking place. there is the printing office from which all the educational ‘lThe infamous Case M (rm-villa added another bloody chapter to the history of Puerto Rico, when under ’Barcelo’s administration three indendentista students were ambushed and executed by the policed. Years after the events the Gmrernment of Puerto Rico lunched and investigation in which the police offers were convicted of murder. Hight-ranking government. officials were also accused of planning and covering up the incident. literature circulating in Vieques is designed and distributed. The only newsletter in V ieques, The Vieques Times, widely read by the community, and of capital importance for the movement, is also produced and printed here. I am still in shock by the way things are unfolding. In less than three hours I have not only met key activists from the different groups but also have visited one of the most important places in which the articulatory process takes place. Alianza de l\‘Iujeres and the printing office. As usually happens while doing fieldwork, the anthropologist is not the only one asking questions, so I had to respond to Miguel’s inquiries. Either because Miguel himself was more than aware of the dangers of historical amnesia and mulerstood as essential the documentation of current events, or because previous contact with anthropologists makes him sympathetic towards me, or simply out of a vague paternal sympathy (one of Miguel’s sons is close to my age) I think that he saw in me something like an t-tppt‘eilticc. As such, and after taking Dona Isabelita and her companion to catch the 3 o’clock ferry back to Fajardo, Miguel decided to show me the rest to be seen of the complex network of people and groups infusing life to the mobilization against the US. Navy. Our first. but quick stop, was in Campamento Justicia y Paz, which was right. in front of Camp Garcia. as a constant reminder to the US. Navy of the challenge to their military power. Between Camp Garcia and Campamento J usticia y Paz, on the other hand, a barricade of eight or nine Puerto Rican policemen were guarding the gate of the military base —serving as a. coutiter-reminder as well— refer to Figures 2.4 and 2.5. As Miguel explained to me, one of the first strategies of the civil dis- obedience movement was to take the entrance of the military base and establish a civil disobedience camp: which they did. But after the mas- sive operatitm of May fifth. in which the protestors were arrested by the FBI. the Navy rctook the entrance and placed a. police camp exactly where C51 (0 Figure 2.4: Campamcnto Justicia y Paz. Source: Taken by the author. '4 ' -' “we n .éll it}; u Figure 2.5: Camp Garcia‘s Gates Guarded by the Police. Source: Taken by the author. 53 the protestor’s camp used to be. Even when the presence of the police was meant to intimidate protestors, the material remains of the previ— ous camp and the paintings denouncing the military injustices —placed on the fence of the police camp— were simultaneously defying such at- tempts. The physicality of this geography, therefore, was inscribed with signs which were not only the result of current struggles but which were fighting signs themselves attesting a fierce struggle over meaning and who defines reality— refer to Figures 2.6, 2.7 and 2.8. l cut-um- ?‘1,.... *9. £th Figure 2.6: Shooting Range: Painting on Military Base’s Fence. Source: Taken by the author. Just like in Alianza de Mujeres, people in Campamento Justicia y Paz were getting ready for a march rallying option two in the Referendum Cn'ollo: the immediate retreat of the US. Navy from Vieques.5 So, af— ter distributing among those present all the paraphernalia for the march 5E1 Referendum Criollo seek to clarify whether or not Viequenses were in favor or against the US. Navy’s presence in the island. After months of campaigns, the referendum took place on June ‘20. 2001, drawing a staggering 80.6 percent of the 5,893 registered voters. The outcome was that 68 percent of the Viequenses voted against the Navy’s presence in the island. While I was conducting my research. there were many rumors that the US. Navy was bribing possible voters to swing their vote in favor of the Navy. These rumors were confirmed when 4 years later, February 25, 2005, the Defense. Department was forced to release the US. Navy contract documents showing the payment of $1,699,830.00 to a public relations firm known as The Rendon Group with the purpose of influencing the outcome of the election. Source: http://www.cadu.org.uk/info/countries/21-1.htm. 54 Figure 2.7: Statue of Liberty: Painting on hriilitary Base’s Fence. Source: Taken by the author. Figure 2.8: Pitirre: Painting on Military Base’s Fence. Source: Taken by the author. 55 —Puerto Rican flags. bumper stickers, educational literature, etc. —we headed towards the first. of the at least two barrios which we ended up covering in a tiring but exciting four hour walk— refer to Figures 2.9, 2.10, 2.11 and 2.12 on pages 56. 81. 82 and 83 respectively. Figure 2.9: Part of the four hours march through Vieques’ neighborhoods. Taken by the author. My picture of V ieques, up to that moment, was based 011 my childhood and adrflescent recollections of camping on beautiful beaches. So it was surprising to see both, how similar these barrios were to my own —a pot— pourri of wooden and cement houses intimately related by their proximity and their lack of economic resources —and how much they differ from the tourist side of the island. Flowing like a leaf in the rush of the events I suddenly realized that per- haps it was not a good idea for my research to be seen my first day on the island in a rally that would situate me in one side of a polarized content, without even having the chance to talk to the other side, the pro-Navy people. But like a leaf being carried away by the wind, there was very little I could do. Besides, I also wanted the US. Navy to leave the island. Hundreds of people singing. a sea of Puerto Rican flags waving, people 56 handing pamphlets, was nothing new in Puerto Rico —one of the countries with the highest electoral participation in Latin America ——and yet some- thing in the ambience was very different. I think that it was the intensity of how people were experiencing the rally: it felt truly as a matter of life or death. I felt the march (and all the following activities that I attended) was charged with a strong solidarity, with consensus and when confronting with pro-Navy people it became charged with tension although not ag- gression. At most, some colorful verbal exchanges were made but rapidly stopped by the “peace staff,” a group of people in charge of making sure that things did not get. out of control. From the observation point of the civil disobedience movement, on the highest hill of the island (Monte Carmelo) I’m being observed from the other side of the fence by US. Marines while writing these lines. Monday, June 29, 2001 The day of (21 referendmn criollo arrived after weeks of campaigns, marches and protests. The tensions that saturated the ambience until that moment got disperse in front. of the results — 80 % of the Viequences voted for the immediate retreat. of the US. Navy from Vieques — and festivity and joy overtook the masses that Monday— refer to Figure 2.13, on page 84. Or at least that was my first impression until a woman with tears in her eyes confessed me that she was not crying of happiness as everybody else was, but on the contrary she was crying out of angry because she just learned that that very day of referendum the battle ships for the next military practices where send it to V ieques— refer to Figure 2.14, on page 84. The following day of 81 'I‘eferenduxm. criollo a march was organized to symbolically retuesent the death of option three and to give to the US. Navy and order of eviction from Vieques signed by the Alcalde of Vieques Damaso Rivera. A black casket was build for the purpose of putting in— side of it all the propaganda of option three found on the way to Camp Garcia— refer to Figures 2.15, 2.16, 2.17 and 2.18, on pages 85, 85, 86, 86 respectively. Dona Carolna, the women that talked to me the night before, was also in the march. In her late forties, Dona Carolina responded to my questions of how did she got. involved into the protests by telling me that she lived all her life in Vieques but the situation in the nineties got a bit difficult so she (‘llllgl'ttted to California. where she had some family and where she got married. \-'\"'hen two years ago the people of Vieques started to protesting and getting into the restrained miltary areas she flew back to Vieques to participate in the protests. Once in Vieques she got romantically in— volved with one of the fisherman who was actively involve in the protest so she divorced and stayed for good in Vieques. She was one of the many l/‘iequcrz.s‘cs who stayed in camps in the shooting areas for more than a year. When I asked her why was she doing civil disobidience she responded that, “The US. Navy is killing us. There are people in my family with cancer. I myself have the vibroacustica disease. Sometimes I want to take up arms and fight them out— ‘sacarlos de Vieques a balazos’ (get them out. at gunpoint.) -so that they can try a cup of their own soup.” My interest in Vieques started with a previous research experience (Summers of 1999 and 2000) in Central Mexico (Querétaro). I conducted research in Maria Magdalena, an ecom)mically marginalized connnunity crossed by the Querétaro river which is highly contaminated by industrial waste. In this project it became clear that there was a. correlation between disease associated to water contamination and a recently established transnational industrial complex. Although the health of the members of my study site was affected by industrial water pollution, they were not able to establish the connections between their health and the environment, minimizing the possibility for collective mobilization. I explored, in that pilot research, one of the processes by which a collective myopia was produced by the medical regime concealing devastating new environnrental/health relationships. 58 In contrast. to Querétaro, the people of Vieques, Puerto Rico, have successfully been able to organize and mobilize their (’lifferent subject. positions. This has enabled them to mobilize around issues of health and envirmnnent. To understand the success of \"ietpies' collectives mobilizations we need to look at the historical conditions that made it viable. 2.0.2 A Genealogy of Collective Actions The struggle against the US. Navy has a. long history. The Puerto Rican inhabitants of \"ieques have been protesting the US occupation of their territory since 1941 when the US. Navy established their military base 011 the island. Through the follow- ing decades (sixties, seventies and eighties) there were numerous protests—not only about Vieques. but also about the colonial situation. However. the political ambience in Puerto Rico was not a fertile soil for such voices to be heard. During those years, the ambience was dominated prime-n'ily by the right wing party Partido Nuevo Prog'resista (PXI’) or the ct)nservative center party Partido Popular Democmtz’ca (PPD). These parties‘ political agendas did not include entering into anything that could appear antagonistic to US. colonial power. On the contrary. they strived to strengthen the U.S.-Puerto Rican relationship. Although Puerto Rico was not immune to the revo- lutionary effervescence stemming from the national liberation struggles of many for- mer colonies (during and after the sixties), meaning that N acionalistas waged armed struggle against US. colonialism. they were brutally oppressed by the Puerto Rican repressive state. apparatus with the help of US. intelligence services. In addition, the ideological state al')paratus assured that. these ideas did not spread to the rest of the 1’)opula.tion through an educational system re/ producing a non-conflictive US / Puerto Rican history. As Gramsci argued. a lasting articulation of a hegemonic bloc cannot rely on repressive power alone—- for people learn soon to resist it———but must rely on (,liscursive consent. In the particular case of Vieques, even though there were many protests in Puerto Rico regarding the Vieques/ US. Navy situation before, it was not until recently that the issue attracted not only national but internatiom-Ll attention as well. Why now? I argue that. in order to understand this question we have to understand, among other things. the role that globalization has currently played in Puerto Rico, not only in relation with transnational flows of commodities but in relation with “transnational flows of moral values." ideas and images (Wilson, 19971); Hardt and Negri, 2000', Medina, 2001). I argue that transnational discourses, such as human rights, although historically serving as justifications for imperial expansion and colonization, are cur- rently being used by countries of the South and oppressed minorities as a means of liberation. \r'ieques‘ social movement. like the Hawaiian indigenous movement. or the Zapatista movement in Chiapas. is an example of mobilization that was capable of successfully at ppr‘o1_)r'iat.ing and (haploying Western discourses of liberal-democracy and human rights. among others. to fight for their own causes. \\'hile globalization seems to create cultural homogenization, as is with the case of human rights. development. l“)iomedicine or enviromnentalism rhetoric, people do not. relate to these ideas in the same way nor do they give the same meaning to them (W il- son. 10071). ‘12). The interlinkages between webs of significance in multiple contexts enable ll'tlIlSt'lllillI'Etl apprt)priations. which “are fundamentally creative and repre— sent forms of resistance to global honrogenization” (W'ilson, 1997b, 18). These tran- scultural ('liscnrsive amn'opriat.ions bridge large distances through communications technologies. also enabling processes of long-distance identity constitutions and inter- subjectivities. For instance. people in Okinawa also confronting socio/ environmental problems caused by US. military bases are. keenly aware of the Vieques’ strategies and mobilization to confront their common problem. They are not the only ones, however. as there is in fact an emerging and active network established which interconnects other movements as well. The subjectivity of people in the V ieques movement. on the other hand. has been reshaped. by their awareness of their being subjects of in- I.(?I‘Ilz-Iil()11al attention. as both agents of social change and models for other people experiencing similar circuinstances in different places. I’aradoxically, the establish- ment of these kinds of long—distance solidarity networks was possible because of the same historical processes that created globalization. Globa—rlization is cliaracterized by the flexible and mobile organization across national ('50 boundaries of capitalists’ productive activities to reduce costs and maximize profit. While capital has always been mobile it is not. until the seventies that mobility became the defining factor of capitalist production. As Harvey (1990) explains, in the US. economy there was a. transition from Fordism based upon mass production and fixed capital. to flexible capitalism based on sulxrontracting among other things (1990). During the St-‘Vt‘llilt’s, international competition and OPEC’s raising prices created a spiral of economic crises. The subsequent stagfiaction (or stagnation and inflation) forcwl cm'porations into a process of restructuring which required the abandonment of the rigidity of production processes that characterized the postwar economic boom. The set of strategies developed to cope with the economic and fiscal crises of those years (1900-1973) was mainly concerned not only with the acceleration of turnover time of production as the dramatic deployment of new technologies in production (automation) and organizational forms (intensive s1tlgicontracting) testified—but also of the turimver time of consumption. As Harvey explains, “The relatively stable aesthetic of Fordist modernism. has given way to all the ferment, instability and fleeting qualities of a postmodernist. aesthetic that celebrates difference, ephemerality, spectacle, fashion. and commodification of cultural forms” (Harvey, 1990, 156). This a('-cel<~>i'atioii of turnover time in 1,)roduction and consumption has led to a shift from the 1')ro('luction of durable goods to the production of ephemeral goods such as events and spectacles. I would argue that this very shift is what has made possible, in the case of Vieques‘ social movements, the manipulation of mass media to their advantage. Htmrever. mass media has not only been useful to Vieques’ collective mobilizatitni in rln-‘torical terms ~~with charismatic narratives of David vs. Goliath bz-ittleswbut also in very instrumental ways—to document ongoing abuses, to exercise . public pressure on the govermnent or the Navy, and to protect people doing civil disobethence in the bombing areas. Yet this is not an innocent relationship because if it is true that the current context in which "1i\s'e-spectacle” has made possible the visibility of Vieques social movements. it has done so by way of its corm’nodification (i (particularly by TV news and newspapt-érs). \N’hile the shift. to the production of “Live-spectacle of the kind found on the internet (with people broadcasting their lives online). on TV shows (like Real Police), and TV news (all with a "realist" emphasis on live experience" ). 61 ephemeral goods has opened up spaces of resistance in Vieques, it has also framed the limits of such resistance to the “logic.” of accelerated turnover time. This is exemplified by Vieques’ activist awareness of how important keeping the “drama” going is to keep the public’s attention. which is what made the movement possible and successful in the first place. The public’s short attention span. on the other hand,— again structured by the logic of highly rapid turnover time-~~~has proven to be one of the most difficult challenges facing the Vieques movement, which has nonetheless been able to sustain itself within this context by creating symlmlically powerful cultural productions. For instance. in one of the marches organized by Comite Justicia. y Paz (an activist organizaticm in Viecpies) people carried to the Camp Garcias’ gate coffins representing cancer deaths in Vieques. Another, and 1‘)robably the best example of this cultural resistance (by means of using the "logic" of the acceleration of turnover time) is the participation of very important figures in the entertaimnent industry-— both in. the US. and Puerto Rico—in civil disobedience, which is transmitted live through TV from the moment they enter the restricted areas to the moment they are arrested. Other instances include those of famous local and international singers (such as (.‘uban composer and singer Sylvio Rodrigues, Argentinean singer Mercedes Sosa. among others). who compose music and lyrics. and record videos benefiting the people of \Vicques. From these examples it becomes clear that the shifts in the economy that enabled the movement. of cmmuodities globally, has also enabled the circulation of important (iliscourses such as the human rights and liberal dmnocracy. As Laclau explains. . . . the democratic principle of liberty and ecpiality . . . as the new matrix of the social imaginary. ..constxitutes a fundamental nodal point in the construction of the 1')(‘)lit.ical. . . . [This nodal point] would provide the dis- cursive conditions which made it possible to propose the different forms of inequality as illegitimate and anti-natural, and thus make them equiv- alent as forms of oppression. Here lay the profound subversive power of the democratic discourse, which would allow the spread of equality and liberty into increasingly wider (iloniains and therefore act as a. fermenting (52 agent upon the ('liffereut forms of struggle. against suliiordination (Laclau \ and .\l(_mfl'e, 1985. 155). The success of Vieques’ social movements has depended upon the appropriation of these discourses. These discourses. or as Appadurai has called them, "ideoscapes,” have made it possible in Vieques for an ensemble of ideas and values (those of human rights. environnrentalism, and particularly peace) to be shared by groups that were otln‘rwise antagonistic, thus making collective action possible.7 What is new and thcwiretically relevant about tl'1ese social mobilizations is their rhetor- ical shift. from previous collective mol)ilizations. After the military expropriation of land back in 1940. the struggle in Vieques was framed in terms of an anti-colonial OD struggle (1950—1980). As I previously mentioned, during the Cold War, Leftists’ movements were. repressed and kept at bay from public debates. During the 80’s. collective mobilization tried to bring to the forefront issues of economic develcn‘nnent. such as the case of fishermen in \f’ieques. \r\7hile incxlei'atel‘v successful in attracting media attentitm. they were incapz-tble of fostering popular support. It was not until late in the 90‘s that collective mobilization not only won popular support but inter- national recognition. Collective mobilization in Vieques deployed discourses framed in terms of health. enviromncnt and human rights. These discourses were less ob- viously threatening to the status quo, hence they gained widespread support in the public arena. By shifting their discursive strategy from the realm of “politics” to the realm of the "body." 1r‘icqucvzscs. for the first time, successfully hailed, enrolled and built significantly strong and numerous coalitions with historically opposed religious. political and social groups. It is only in this light that we can understand how for the first time in Puerto Rican history a right-wing governor and president of the PNP. P. Rossello, demanded, in. a. US. congressional hearing about \f'ieques in 1999. the. innnediate withdrawal of the US. Navy from Vieques (even if later he had to retract his position). TIdcmscapes are fiuid configurations of “ideas, terms, and images" that circulate globally (Ap- pacllll‘ni. 1990. 33.36) 63 The formation of a collective will around the issue of Vieques was possible because the. contradictions of the discursive formation in place—that. of the colonial regime and its normative institutions justifying military occupation—became evident. As Laclau (1985) argued. discursive formations are never totally sutured, for they can never encompass all possible meai’iings. Enviromnental and health crises such as the ones found in \-’ieques overflow bioiuedicine's atomistic discourses with a plurality of meanings. This overflow of lllt-‘Ellllllg is the result of very material (if always semi- ot ic) st)citi/.t’eii\'ir'(inmental relations. If we agree. with the idea that people’s identities are in part shaped by dominant discursive formations, then any instability of these formations must. affect people’s self perceptions. As Laclau explains, the subject is ccmstructed through language, as a partial and metaphorical incorporation into a symbolic order, [and that] any putting into question of that order must necessarily constitute an identity crisis” (Laclau and l\louffe, 1985. 120). In the case of \"ieques. this identity crisis goes beyond the discursive realm in that it becomes evident when through the proliferation of sick bodies. The junctural space where “envirtinments." "bodies" and “military practices“ meet. allows Vieque'nses to see the colonial contradictions in a ('liffcrent light. Because the established medical regime was not able to satisfy people’s quest for an explanation of the high incidences of disease, people started to organize around that issue. This organizing put pressure on the medical institutions in place to investigate peoples "suspicions" about the negative impact, of the military practices on people’s hcalt h. The movements success has to also be understood in terms of the particular political situation of Puerto Rico in relation to the status quo. The organizing was successful in applying pressure because. among other things. at that particular moment the movement (1995-2003). the ambience was such that the government could not easily dismiss public concern. The reason: elections were close to taking place. Vieques” social movement. was effective in capturing attention by employing a. rhetoric with 04 the capacity of enrolling people on the basis of morality: it would have been immoral to overltmk the fact that children were dying in \-'ie(u1es. Because the \«"ie<’111(\s situation involved children‘s health in a context in which child— hood is regarded as pure. innocent. and therefore removed from “politics,” it was safe for mainstream politicians to include the issue in their political platforms. Each one of the three parties l’Nl). PPD and I’a-rtzido [ndependentista. Puertmrziquezno (PIP) had to make the necessarv adjustments in relation to how they framed the issue without contradicting their philosophical stance. in relation to the colonial status. The Part ido Nuevo l’rogresista (PNP). the right. wing party, was the most hesitant in getting involved in the \v’iequt-rs issue. The reason is that. they see any relation with the 1S even the military one. as a means to secure good political relations that. they hope. will pave the way for the annexation of Puerto Rico as the 51st state. Anything that might be interpreted by them as sounding "anti—American” is immediately cast as heresy because of its potential to jeopardize annexation. Very recently (Summer 2001). because of their conservativisn1. great internal ccn‘if'licts developed when some 111embers of the party supported the \‘Teques’ movement -—~in opposition to the senior patriarchs like Ferre and Romero. The most. publicized example is that of Norma Burgos. who held an imptn'tant position within the party. and who. because of her participation in civil disobedience. was recently incarcerated for a month. From the strategic point: of view of party politics it makes total sense to get involved in the Vieques movement. in order to regain some of the support. lost l.)ecause of their conservative political stance. ()n the other hand. the left wing party. Partido In,(lepende'ntista Puertom'z'q'ue-rio (PIP). was the most invested of all parties in the \f'ieques’ movement. For instance. the president of the PIP. Ruben Berries. spent a whole year of civil disobedience in the restricted area. of" the military base for which he was later incarcerated for more than six months. The reason for this commitment has been that their understanding of the situation is framed in terms of the colonial condition. Thus. Vieques is but a micromsm of Puerto Rico. Their political stance with regard to the status quo of (5:3 Puerto Rico is that the only possible solution for colonialism is independence. The center party. Partido Popular Dt—i'ln.()cmtico (Pl’D). was also vocal about V ieques’ case. Their status quo rhetoric. based on the idea. of “enjoying the best of two worlds.” enabled them (at that moment) to swing their discursive pendulum to the nationalist side. appropriating In(lepemlentisto's rhetoric and syn‘rbols to ally themselves with the \"ieques mm'ement. By framing the Vieques situation in nationalistic terms but without bringing the colonial status to the foreground. the PPD was the most effective in monopolizing the situation. The (‘lifliculty with their maneuver has been that after two years in power they are incapable of ('lelix-cring that which the masses dt—nnand. the immediate withdrawal of the US. Navy from \f'ieques, clearly exposing the limits of the "Ctunnmnwealth" and adding yet another layer to the meaning of colonialism in Puerto Rico. The implicatitms of these jn'ocesses are the availability of new repertoires of subject positions (even if still using the same old symbols). For instance. a new iteration of the reaffirmation of a “Puerto Rican Self” in the context of an imagined nation which finds itself in a non/imaginary colonial order. What is important. for now. is that. even with different degrees and at different n10- ments the three parties were able to attract. public. opinion to their side by deploying Vieques situation. The converse is also true. and even more important; Vieques’ movement was able to articulate a collection of (,liscursive repertoires with the capac- ity to interpellate people in subject positions quite opposite to their previous ones. establishing alliances across 1’)olitical axes. The legitimat ion of the status quo. therefore. becomes challenged and layers of mean- ing that were not broadly circulating or were not even available to the masses, sud— denly nurture public opinion. giving people ammunition to pressure into action certain instituticms (political 1')arties. govermnent. the Health Department. etc). As a corol- lary to this. the legitimation of practices and world-views within key institutions are also challenged. (it) 2.0.3 Health: The Missing Link Since the US. Navy expropriated '2/3 of the land during the 40's. Vieques has been used for military exercises. These exercises include: air. land and sea bombings. the shooting of live annnunition (napalm and shaft). and mining areas for training. among other exercises. However. it. was not. until the early 1980s that residents started to notice that more and more people were becoming sick in their community. Seeing cancer (“liagnoses increase. within the community, a group of people demanded that the Puerto Rican Department of Health study the ongoing increase of health risks. The findings published in 1.997. were clear; the people of Vieques had a 27% higher risk of getting cancer than inhabitants of other municipalities in Puerto Rico. Medical authorities therefore recognized that people’s perceptions about increases in health risks were more than ”hysteria.” Although island residents and the Department. of Health agreed about the existence of high health risks. contestation continues as to the origins and causes of the problem. Cormnunity members argued that. there was a correlation between rising cancer rates and changes in US. Navy military practices. By contrast, the Department of Health maintained that the. cause of higher cancer rates is grounded in the community’s “life styles and individual behavior." The community members vociferously offended by this conclusion. turned to the School of Public Health at the University of Puerto Rico for a re-cwaluation of the data. The School of Public Health corroborated the Depart.mt~~>nt's epitlemiological conclusions. but. disagreed with the Department’s em- phasis on life styles and behavior. As explained by epidemiologist Cruz Mara Nazario, "You cannot say that [John Doej’s cancer is because of his smoking habits if you never tried to ask him if he was a smoker! 8 A central question puzzling e1)idemiologists rmmtined. If. in fact. the decline in pub- lic health was derived from naval activities near the Puerto Rican connnunities on Vieques. 11(-"liil1(-‘1' the mechanism nor proximate cause(s) of the problem was clear in bTranslation mine. Cruz Rivera is the head epidemiologist of the School of Public Health. Inter- view recorded on August 17. ()1. the early 1080s. In 2000 activists (liscovered that. the Navy had secretly used depleted uranium bombs during their military practices prior to the 1980s. Depleted uranium is carcinogenic. This. ('(illli’)i.ll(‘(fl with other evidence of historical chemicz—rl weapons testing on the island.” heightened the controversy. 2.0.4 lVlethodology I aim to develop an understanding of how drastic environmental cl‘ianges affect peo- ples perceptions of health. (.lisease and self within their everyday lives. In other words. how people constitute their selves out of their “local” enviromnent— even more so when both are entangled in relations stretching beyond local and personal boundary projects. In this sense. peoples identity and perceptions are actively forged by a historically situated embodied-self engaged with complex socio/environmental relat ions. By looking at the agency of people’s articulations of their subject positions~— through the standpoint of their engagements with a changing environment— I maintain we can gain insights into new processes of identity formation. This is true in contexts plagued with contestation over health and environment. As we will see in chapters to come I compare how lay people. scientists and government. articulate competing discourses on disease etiology. as these feed into forming new identities leading to Collective action. For my dissertation I relied on: (1) archival information (‘2) peoples narratives and (3) ethnographic data. lst l’hase: During the first part of my dissertat ion I reestablished rapport with both Vieques" connnunity members and local scholars. Particularly useful were my con- versations on epidemiological aspects of my research with Dr. Cruz Maria Nazario. head of the School of Public Health at the University of Puerto Rico. Her collabo- i’As recently as October 7'. 2002. high officials of the Department of Defense admitted the utiliza- tion of Vieques in 190!) to carry experiments with chemical weapons. particulz-irly “trioctyl phosphate. " This is another known carcinogenic. US ration provided me. with advice. and vital archival health information regarding the ongoing studies done by different institutions in Puerto Rico. This opportunity gave me unique access to documents produced by institutions such as: the Department, of Health and the School of Public Health. Originally I planned to also look at the Archive Historico de Puerto Rico and the Museo de H'z75t07‘m (1e. Vieques, but time restraints prevented this. I researched newspapt-u's to reconstruct the different debates and public perceptions over health and environment. across time. This information coupled with in—depth interviews enabled me to compare different actors’ articulations of competing (list-('uirses. During this phase I also pie-tested my survey instrument. 2nd Phase: I gathered localized public. narratives on health, illness. and environment. Recollecting these narratives allowed me to identify what particular discourses, sto- ries. and conceptions people use to produce collective meanings of their oppressing circumstances. Since I am interested in documenting changes in health. disease. and environmental perceptions across time. I asked questions in which participants retro- spect ively rectumted such changes in relation to their l1)iographies. Examples of some questions I used are: What does it mean for you to be healthy? \\'hat does it mean for you to be ill with a debilitating illness. not just a cold? What things do people get sick with around here? \\"hat is the most important health problem that you have confronted within the last. twenty years? \‘Vhen did you realize that something went wrong? Did a doctor diagnose it? In what way-4's has that. affected your life‘.’ How have you confronted it? What do you think is the cause (or causesi of your health problems’.’ I gathered this information with an ethnographic. survey. The ethnographic survey differs from the traditional survey in that it. emerges from a previous fieldwork expe- rience. "[ltsl strength lies in the fact that the survey variables and items emerge from the local context. The local foundations of the survey (.‘11l12-111('C its validity” (Schen- sul et al.. 1995)). During my first visit. (summer 2001). I conducted pre-dissertation fieldwork in \f’ieques. It is out of this experience that I prepared the ethnographic questionnaire I used in my dissertation research. I used a nonprol)ability sample (5?) getting a cross-section of the population. This method yields information on situ— ilarities and differences in health perceptions along generz‘itional. class and, 0‘ender litres (Schensul et al.. 1999). Because I used a nonprol)ability sample. I aimed my ethnographic survey to different actors (such as activists and nonactivists) making it possible to explore various views (Bernard. 2002). The definition of these different actors stemmed. as much as possible. from peoples" own terms-—— the ethnographic survey served this purpose. During my three summers (2001. 2002. 2003) doing re- search in Vieques I formally did in-depth interviews with over 50 people. In my daily interactions. however. I talked to hundreds. I interviewed both residents who were not involved in the movement as well as activists from both rural and urban areas. Nonetheless. because I was interested in the emergence of social movements I focused more on lv’z'r'qmrnscs‘ activists. Since I am looking at changes in health perceptions in a span of twenty years. I mostly intervimved people who were older than 30. and therefore. who could retrospectively talk about such changes. Given that women’s participat ion in organizing and participating in different activists" mobilizaticm I spent a great deal of time speaking with them. 3rd l’hase: The ethnographic survey provided me with exceptional cases in Vieques that later I followed up with in-depth interviews and oral histories. It was through these oral histories that the relationship between health. health risks and individual biographies in their linkages with collective mobilization later becan‘ie evident. As both a method to conduct and analyze interviews I paid attention to: I) .\Ioral language. 2) Meta statements and. 3) Logic of the narrative (Anderson and Jack. 1091). Listening to people‘s moral language enables us to understand how people evaluate and construct their not ions of self by whether they comply with the socially assigned roles as they are revealed by their own explanat ions. “.\Ieta—state1nents,” on the other hand. alert us to the individual's awareness of a discrepancy within the self— or between what is expected and what. is being said. They inform the interviewer about what categories the individual is using to monitor her thoughts. and allow observation of how the person socializes the feeling T0 or thoughts according to certain norms (Anderson and Jack. 1991. 22). By looking at the logic of the narrative we can start “noticing the internal consistency or contradictions in the person’s statements about recurring themes and the way these themes relate to each other” (Anderson and Jack, 1991. 22). -»1th I’hase: In my research. consciousness cannot be separated from the experiential body because it is in the body that environmental contradictions get expressed and from the body that. any awareness of. and action against, such contradictions might emerge. Because of this. I was particularly observant of narratives that illustrated embodied understandings of the rapidly changing health and environment landscape. I sought "to take the body as a nrethodological starting point rather than consider the body as an object. of study” (Csordas. 1993. 136). As the case of Vieques illustrates, it was through the body —- as the eventual register of epidemiological changes— that people’s political awareness awakened. Thus. redefinitions of the self while discur- sively informed were mostly experientially rooted. This observed epistemology of the body that. is. how people came to generate new knowledge and understandings of their surroundings and of them selves through their bodies— informed my own em- phasis on recognizing “embodiment as the existential condition in which culture and self are grounded” (Csordas. 1993, 136). Participant observation enabled me to follow how V ieques‘ inhabitants generated etiological. explanatimrs out of their living experiences and their engagements with and movements across a shifting militarizecl landscape (Ingold, 2000). In order to get at how people perceived their militarized landscapes. I attended to the ways in which their sensory descriptions—«- particular ways of hearing. seeing, smelling and moving their bodies — articulz—rted processes of orientations and of attending the world that informed and as informed by (and perhaps created) social practices of resistance. As Cenrts (2002) explains. \V’e routinely engage in (culturally constituted) interaction or practices that are governed by the meanings assigned to (or ways of interpreting) certain smells. sounds. touches. tastes. and so forth. In turn. the orienta- tions one develops toward smell. sight, sound. and such. are part of what shapes certain cultural practices (Geurts. 2002. 235). Moreover. as she reminds us. the senses are ways of embodying social categories. [hence] how one be- comes socialized toward the meaning of sights. sounds. smells. tastes, and so forth. represents a critical aspect of how one accptires a mode of being- in-tluj-world. or an “individual system of experiencing and organizing the world" (Genrts. 2002, 232-33). By attending to people’s narratives of how they experienccxl smells. sounds. tastes. in relation to the militarized landscal’)e. allowed me to take part in people’s everyday life. activities "as one of the means of learning the explicit and tacit aspects of their life routines" (De\\-’alt and DeWa.lt., 2002). This approach radically differs from others in that it is not based on a disemlmdied gaze. This method gave me a glimpse into the ways in which the people of Vieques inti-irsubjec‘tively generate meta-narratives and social practices to reframe their identities (Laclau and Mouffe. 1985; Medina, 2001). 2.0.5 Participant Observation, Personal Experience and Ac- tivism Very much in line with feminist scholars. my metlmdologies and theories are grotmded on who I am and where I come from. From the academic point of View, my initial interest in environmental issues is based on a previous research experience (Summers of 1999 and 2000) in Queretaro, Central Mexico. In this project it became clear that there was a correlation between disease associated with water contamination and a recently established transnational industrial complex. Although the health of the members of my study site was affected by industrial water pollution, they were not able to establish the ctmnections I)€t\\-’(—‘Gll their health and the environment, minimiz— ing the possibility for collective. mobilization. I explored. in that pilot research, one a] [\3 of the processes by which a collective myopia. was 1')roduced by the medical regime (:‘oucealing devastating new enviromnental/ health relationships (Taussig. 1980). At the same time I was doing research in Mexico. Vieques" social movement exploded around the very same issues in which I was interested. In contrast to Querétaro. however. the people of Vieques were successful in organizing and mobilizing their different subject positions around health and enviromnental problems. As a Puerto Rican I (I(_‘.('i('I(-?(I to change my research site to V ieques. My interests in Vieques. however. go beyond the academy. They are tied to my personal experiences with social inequality and with illness. I come from a working class neigl1borhood in San Juan in what used to be a squatter settlement back in the 1930's. Coming from such a context of socioeconomic depri— vation made me wonder from an early age about. the causes of my family’s marginal condition. I vividly remember how difficult it. was for my mother trying to answer my early inquiries about our situation. It was not. until I grew older that I could name what until then were for me the hidden forces that once subjected many to an unprivileged comlition. In the university I learned to name the historical. eco- nomic and I'iiolitical reasons that explain my personal experience growing up in Barrio ()brero.”’ Education served me as a way of escaping those alien forces. My escape has indeed taken me a long distance and away from my place of origin. And yet no matter how far or how echtcated I am the forces that before subjected me. and many others. to a marginal condition can still exercise over me their invisible powers. I experienced their full l)l()\ a few years ago, while working on my Ph.D., when my mother was diagnosed with colon cancer. I could not but wonder if the places in which we lived. public housing projects. which until recently were constructed with l“Barrio ()brero is located in the periphery of the Central Business District (CBD) in San Juan. the capital of Puerto Rico. The squatter origins of Barrio ()brero began in the 1960’s when the industrialization process in Puerto Rico prompted large influxes of migration from the rural areas and the subsequent inhabitation of wet lands. Coming from that particular urban environment means that one belongs to a group that. by (‘lelinitioiL is nuu'ginalized. This marginalization is not only reflected in the obvious economic and material factors but also in the negative representation of this social group by the mass media. the ruling classes and the government. As a result, the place and its inhabitants are discriminated against as a whole. with an exogenous. undesirable, and a tlzvrtteued identity imposed on them that is both unfair and inaccurate. asbestos (a known carcinogenic). were responsible for her disease. The concept of environmental inequality. since then has acquired a. new and painful meaning that. is constantly feeding and guiding my personal and professional interests. I have to briefly include my tribulations as a son of a cancer patient for they point to important continuities with the Vieques situation. After a whole year of going to the public hospital to treat. what we thought was a bad case of hemorrhoids. the doctor ordered a biopsy that yielded positive for cancer. Here is where the odyssey started. Since the mid nineties Puerto Rico. just like many other Latin American countries. began implementing a draconian regime of neoliberal policies with the result, that health care, formerly provided by the state, was now privatized. The basic assumption of privatization is that health care services will improve because people will be paying for better care. This logic might hold true for the social classes with resourccs but not. for the majority of the people in Puerto Rico. I-I.\I()s are popping up now like fast—food restaurants. and like fast-food chains they are ccunpetiug not. only for clients/ patients but also to capture governmental monies that subsidize the unprivileged. But. if fast-food is not good for your health, neither are these I—I.\I()s. The level of absurd bureaucratization would astonish even Franz Kafka, the Gerriran-Jewish writer who succimrtly ('Iepicted the alienating and disempoweriug effects of ccmfronting a bureaucrz-tcy in novels such as The Castle and The Trial (Kafka. 1957). Although my mother received the radio and chemotherapy in Centre l\Ie(.lico. the main state hospital on the island. the follow-up visits after the treatment were to take place in the HMO of Barrio ()brero. which is where we lived. Not only was the munber of patients seen in that. clinic colossal. but so was the waiting time to get. an appointment let alone to see a doctor. In the case of my mother. she needed to see a colon chirurgical specialist. \V’e went to at least six (’lifferent offices. in (‘lif’ferent locations, and argued with many uninformed and plainly ignorant health care representatives to get the required signatures to approve the treatment. Needless to say. all the offices that we went to were in the same situation as the HMO of Barrio Obrero. It took us more than a month to get the appointment. with the surgeon. I am a young. well-edticated Tl and energetic person and for me going through all the bureaucratic channels was a l'i‘iglitt_*iiiiig. dreadful and exhausting (‘.\'})(-‘1'l('ll('(‘. I could not but think what would be ol' my mother had I not been there. What is more. heart. breaking is to know that many older people like my mother. do not have the energy nor the. help from other people to go through those trials to get health care attention. Not only do they have. to confront the scary situation of being sick, but they also have. to fight the monster of bureaucracy all on their own. This personal account offers a glimpse into the implications of neoliberal policies and the subsequent privatization of health care services in Puerto Rico that a Political Ecology of Disease approach can elucidate. My class—situated account also illustrates that not only are chronic diseases unevenly distributed but. so is access to health care. .\Ioreoyer. the prt‘xluction of unhealthy toxic environments* such as the public, housing projects built with asbestos in which I lived with my mom -— are dispropor— tionately absorbed by the most unprivileged sectors of the population. These personal experiences did more than just: inform my interests and theories, for they deeply informed my metliodology. \Vhile pz-u'ticipant observation is usually de- fined as the active engagement in people's daily activities to gain understanding, this literature very randomly discusses the meaning of this method in a highly politicized context. such as Vieques. Civil disobt-rdience was in Vieques part of people’s daily life. experience. My decision of getting involved in civil (:lisobedienct-x however. did not stem from methodological concerns but rather it emerged out of the anger in learning about the health situation in Vieques. I went into the firing range with a brigade of eight people. We hid during four days and we walked at night until finally reaching our target: to stop military practices by serving as human shields against the bombs fired from different Navy ships. We did disrupt military practices for that day, but we were also arrested. I spent two days in jail and I was sentenced to a year of probation time that forbade me from traveling. In what. follows I include. my self—(‘lefense state- ment in the 1-7.5. District (lourt legal case against me. I do so to illustrate the ways in which embodied experience has the power to change people's subject positions in the context. of health and enviroiimental crises. ct TO: US. District. Attorney Vega FROM: \«*"ictoi‘ .\l. Torres \«v’elez DATE: September 7. 2001 RE: Civil Disobedience On August 5th 2001 I was arrested in Camp Garcia’s firing range for civil disobedience. That is. serving as a human shield against the US. Navy's bombing in Vieques. .\lr. \'ega. I accepted the evidence presented against me. \"ictor .\l. Torres mm . born and raised in Barrio (.)brero. Santurce. I authorize my lawyer. .\Ir. Lora. to represent me in my absence in this legal proceeding. Nonetheless. I cannot finish this letter without clarifying the reasons for my involvement in the civil disobedience movement against the presence of the U.S. Navy in Vieques and their genocidal military practices... Currently I am finishing my PhD. in Socio/cultural and l\‘Iedical Anthro- pology. I was in Vieques conducting research for my dissertation. I was interested in understanding people‘s notions of disease. and the level of their articulation in terms of their relationship with the enviromnent and the [-25. military practices. Even when I was familiar with the statistics about cancer and respiratory disease in \v'ieques. l was not prepared for what I witnessed on the island. How could I just observe and document without getting “that involved" when the people I was interviewing are forced to live their lives in a war zone‘.’ How could I just. (_)l‘)serve without. get ting "that. involved” when there are children and elders dying of cancer and other diseases because of the US. Navy’s military practices? “flien I arrived at \""ieques. even though I totally supported the struggle to evict the US. Navy from the island. I was not planning to get in the shooting area. Nonetheless, after I have seen with my eyes the disastrous impact of the US. Navy on people’s lives. serving as a human shield was but the least thing I could do to be in peace with my ccmscience. Tti Victor .\l. Torres Velez PhD. (‘andidate Michigan State University I am not the first anthropologist — nor will I be the last —— to get “that. involved“ with the research sit e. In fact my experience is similar to that of other anthropologists. For instance. Amadiume’s (1993) experiences resonate deeply with my own situation in multiple ways. The colonial situation motivated Amadiume to conthtct her fieldwork "back home." just as it has motivated my decision to do research in Puerto Rico.11 Because "the Social Science Research Council of Great Britain viewed fieldwork as something done by strangers and not by those returning to their own society” Ama- diume did not receive funding. having to raise it herself (Amadiume. 1993. 183). The situation with US. granting agencies is not. different from Britain, meaning that if I did not do fieldwork “abroad" I could not. apply to important sources of funding. .\loreover. because granting agencies make their decisions based upon the “feasibil- ity" and "validity" that. "objective" resea’n'chers provide. I had the challenging task of framing my research proposal in their terms. This proved to be difficult not only l)t‘("dll.s7(,‘ I am from Puerto Rico and I was personally engaged in the Vieques situation. but also because of the politicized nature of my research site. In her field experience Amadiume (1993) had to come to terms with what she ob- served to be an unjust situation the whitening in power of im‘tt’riarchal institutions in front of British imposed political ones-by negotiating what was her positioning from the outset. Just as for me it was not an option to remain as an objective ob- server while the US. Navy was bombing \I’ieques yet another tilllEP-“(ilGSIJIte the proofs of the devastating corisequences for the health and well-being of the inhabitants of the island for Amadiume (1903) it was not. an option either. Nonetheless, my in- 11The history of anthropology is inextricably tied to colonial and neo/eolonial projects and in fact I always hoped that my work was going to be part of the critique of such projects as a "native anthropologist": as a subaltern voice screaming that which has always being silenced. Even when I still think this way. I have come to I‘ettliZe that my positioning is not as clear-cut as a thought. It is not enough to think that your work is not going to be part of such a colonial project; when the very existence of the discipline in which I am trained came about as a result of that. when the very methods I am using situate me as an observer even if they propose participation. when even this exercise of writing my thoughts becomes highly questionable if I consider for whom I am writing them. ‘1 *1 volvement did not pttt at stake my position as a "wealthy and powerful ancestress” (.~\1nadiume. 1993. 197) similar to the case of :‘Xmadiume. \Vhere she. decided to draw the line— by "not taking up their [women’s council] request to speak to the men in the ruling council on their behalf and by not. challenging those writing the constitution of .\'nobi to make sure that they included women in it” (Amadiume. 1993. 195)-I decided to go ahead and join the civil disobedience taking place in Vieques. Thus, while hoping to continue "the political strurgle with the pen” I also decided to po- sition myself with respect, to what I was witnessing. not just. as an observer but also as an actor. .\ly positioning as an "activist." nonetheless. should not be understood as altruistic or heroic but as one that evolved out of the contingencies, pressures and negotiations of how people I)(—’I'('(‘l'\'(‘(l me and placed me and how I perceived myself in a context of political tensions and suspicions. Allen Abramson (1993) is another anthropologist with similar experiences. In his tu'ticle. Between fl(If!)hint/771.1”)'I/ and Met/rod: Being Male, Seeing Myth. and the Ana- lysis of Structures of Gender and S(:é:1:'11.(ilz?ty in the Eastern Interior of F iii, he is concerned with exploring the way in which both people involved in our anthropolog- ical studies and the anthropologist him/her self are mutually transformed by their interaction. Although. :‘—\bramson’s (1993) treatment. of the "village” as isolated and culturally bounded is highly problematical — as it overlooks trzmscultural exchanges taking place even before the colonial period — his point that. the anthropologist can become subjected to “the logic of categories" of the group under study is important. Just as .r—\br;’unson's (1003) "strangeness" was acconnnodated and incorporated within the "myt liical" structures of the Fijians — meaning that. he. was given a place and was ex- pected to act accm‘dingly — my involvement in civil disobedience was partially shaped by a similar semiotic incorporation of my presence in Vieques. The reinforcement and constant circulation of discourses of involvement and actitm as the most valid way of demonstrating belongingness, tht—erefore was fundamental to my positioning as an activist. Retrospectively. the way in which some people 1*)erceived me as an FBI agent. — because of the history of colonial oj_)pression and surveillance -— definitely limited (8 my participation and the types of activities that. I was eutit led to attend. The fol- lowing exert. is from my field—notes and illustrates this community’s placing of the anthroj'iolt'igist within the community’s narrative structtu'es and the antlrrcmologist attempt of re-situating himself. After several days of playing the anthropoh)gist with that obsessive habit of taking notes all the time in different marches, protests and disobedi- ence‘s camps some faces started to l’)()(,‘.(,)lll€ not. only more familiar but more curious about who I was. This was the case with Eric who after approaching me in Monte Carinelt‘i—identifying himself as a Viequense — inquired without hesitation who the heck I was and what I was doing there. I knew that many people where a. bit nervous because of my pres- ence and many joked about. me being an FBI agent, but I also knew that those jokes meant more than that. I understood why he was questioning me. but this did not make me feel any better because I felt that not only was my identity as a Puerto Rican being questioned but also this ques- tioning somehow aligned me with the US. colonial regime. My imn‘iediate reaction , unconscious and at times conscicuts was to establish right away my “Puerto Ricaness” by making clear my working class origins growing up in Barrio ()brero: “Mano yo soy de'l Barrio y como dice la cancion: de Barrio ()brero a la Quince un paso es." It is clear now that not only for the purpose of dispelling peoples’ fears about me being an agent but also for my emotional well-being I was prompt to establish ra1.)port through my ethnicity and my empathy for their situation— even when my other positioning as a gre’iduate student in anthropology trained in a US uni- versity made me feel I was inhabiting a [')arz-1doxical space (Field notes. \ summer 2001). Abramson (1093) in this i‘t'ispect is right. "what the etlmographer sees is a function of where he is placed. what. is presented to him. and what. he is prevented from easilv L seeing" (Abramson. 1993, TO). The circulation of discourses of active involvement. in civil disobedience. on the other hand. while in tune with my own political ideas. also provided me with the means from which to be relocated in a different. subject position: from an FBI agent. to another Puerto Rican in solidarity with the cause if able to pass the ultimate rite of passage (serving as a human shield in the bombing areas). Abramson ('l093)describes a. process by which etlmographers stop being him/her self because of the fact that within the research context. the etl'n'iographer is devoid of a personal history. As he explains. “self-image has no introspective reality of its own" tAbramson. 1993, 7-1) and your identity has to be constituted through the constant perforinance of symbolic actions that inscribe you in a particular way. Al- though my semiotic comj’)etence in terms of the. history of colonialism in Puerto Rico and my working class origins enabled me to draw upon key discursive repertoires to negotiate my positioning within Vieques civil disobedience groups, my subjec- tive re})ositioniug—--—and I suspect the subjective positioning of many others—includes coercive aspects such as social pressures, jokes, o"ossip, shame, embarrassment, etc. which are present in all community building projects and yet are little discussed in the literature. That is why my positioning as an “activist.” should not be understood as altruistic or heroic but as one that evolved out of contingencies, pressures and negotiations as well as out of my political views against the colonial situation and the US. military presence in Puerto Rico. 8() Figure 2.10: Campaigning for Option Two: Posting Signs. Source: Taken by the author. 81 Figure 2.11: Cam )aiO‘nin ‘ for 0 )tion Two: Handmade Poster. Notice that in this D I o 8 1 poster the pro—Vieques respond to being accused of communist by saying that the "real communist” is the Navy. Source: Taken by the author. 82 ,, ttt'nl‘f'i.‘i?!”""“"“ "91:3” ..itantalum!!!“ 9: {iii Figure 2.12: Option Three Poster: Marx the Specter of Communism. In this poster. the pro-Navy campaign depicts option two as in favor of communism. Source: Taken hy the author. 83 Figure 2.13: El Referendum Crinllo’s: Option Two Victory. Source: Taken by the author. Figure 2.14: Re 'erendum Criollo’s: Victory Option Two. Source: Taken by the author. 84 WC} (a CLLMFCCCC "it; “[3,.“ . ‘iumi' ' V “ Figure ‘21"): Referendum Criollo’s: The Death of Option Three. Source: Taken by the author. Figure 2.16: Referendum C‘ztollo’s: The Death of Option Three, Arriving to Camp Garcias‘ Gate. Source: Taken by the author. 85 Figure 2.17: Refmrnd'uvn. Criollo's: The Death of Option Three: Digging Up the Hole. Source. Taken by the author. ‘ 2:.” “ii-'QIC‘VW'W" ‘5 ”3%; it“ W, ”It. {‘1 Figure 2.18: Refmr'ndunr (77730110 '5: The, Death of Option Three: Buried in the Grave. Source: Taken by the author. 86 Chapter 3 The Making of a Militarized Landscape Sixty years ago Vieques. Puerto Rico. was a trantptil island in the Caribbean where, inhabitants had a life expectancy of 75 years. By 2000, the life expectancy on the island had dropped significantly and the island was the site of demonstrations by people from all over the. world. What are the links between the changes of life ex- [:)e(_-tancy, the social movement centered on Vieques, and how people understand the changes in the environment'.’ I will answer these questions by exploring the intersection of health, environment. and the nnhtary/imlustrial complex in Vieques, as it relates to questions of structural change. human agency and socio-cultural re1.)roduction. Rather than assuming the negative “impact" of glolmlization, I will show the ways in which local actors shape structures imposed upon them. I argue that. despite the extensive geographical expansion of flexible capitalism. the site of accumulation is more than ever situated in subaltern bodies racially, ethnically and culturally marked as different (Hall, 1991; Harvey, 2000). Moreover, I argue that this intensified bodily exploitation has also made them intimate “sites” in which N)(‘i()/(‘ll\"lI'()lllll(‘llitil contradictions are more blatantly expressed (mainly through dis- ease) and as such they are the ultimate “sites” of material—semiiotic struggles (Harvey. 1000: Lowe. 100:3: Morgan. 1087: Taussig. 1080). The body becomes a site of mate- rial struggle in the sense that people are 1')hysically e-itt'ected by chronic diseases and their twerydz-ty activities. It becomes a site of semiotic struggle in the sense that the diseased body becomes a symbol of people’s suffering and a reason to participate in the social movement. Hence the importance of understanding Viequenses’ sub- altern bodies. not only as sites of subjection and accumulation. but also as sites of resist ance. \Vhile people resist this “at a distance" process of exploitation, from the specificity of Vieques’ locale, their resistance also draws from far away resources. It is this combination of a locally rooted and yet transnationally connected resistance that in part explains l'/t(?(]'ll.(,f'ILSRS’ rearticulation of their identities in political terms tSchein. 1000: \\'ilson. 1997b). However, my analysis of this rearticulation is not to be mistaken with theories that conceptualize idmitity in nihilistic and ahistorical terms (Hall. 1900: l-larvey. 1090: Rouse. 1995; Tsing. 2001). As some authors have pointed out. nihilist ic clmracterizations of unconstrained “fiexilde it‘lentities” are more revealing of the influence of capitalists’ restructuring on theory than of that which they attempt to represent (Hall. 1991; Hardt and Negri, 2000; Harvey, 1990). It is no coincidence that. the new it'lentity of catntalism is described in the same war as postmodern theories of identity: that is. flexible, mobile and volatile. \\ hile accounts of identity formation have been “problematized and rendered in- creasingly complex by recent. debates. the notion of place has remained relatively unexamined" (Massey. 1994. 167). Space has been overwhelmingly treated, theoreti- cally and therefore empirically, as an empty recipient divorced from time and place. Some authors have argued that this transhistorical notion of space as abstract. which has systematically concealml space as a social product, constitutes the very regime of bower in which "we" live: that of “modernit-Y” (Lefebvre, 1974)- Spatial domination. therefore. is achieved by this concealing of the production of space and its internal- ization as something external — through the particular configurations of spaces and legitimating discourses. This violence of algistraction is only possible by devoiding space of the historically contingent l)0(ill\"-li\"(?(.l practices and experiences of everyday life that produced it. (Lefebvre. 1.974). The concept of place, by the same token, is always associated with the "local” as it is considered an "indigenous source of cultural 88 identity. which remains "i'lilli‘lltillixlCii only in so far as it. is unsullied by contact with the global" (Massey. 1994. 1.5) . This notion of place not only implies that the identity of places is constit uted through inside/outside bormdary distinctions but also implies a notion of cultures as discrete entities inherently territorialized (Gupta and Ferguson, 1997). instead then. of thinking of places as areas with boundaries around, they can be imagined as articulated moments in networks of social relations and understandings. but where a large proportion of those relations. ex- periences and understandings are constructed on a far larger scale than what. we happen to define for that moment. as the place itself, whether that be a street. or a region or even a continent. This in turn allows a sense of place which is extroverted, which includes a consciousness of its links with the wider world, and which integrates in a possible way the global and the local (Massey, 1994, 155). Drawing from this idea. that. places are formed by social relations contained within them and stretched beyond them. I want to reveal the processes by which Vieques has been produced as both a space of dominaticm and a space of resistance and hope. 3.1 Spaces of Domination: the “Local” as Pro- duced by the “Global” The production of Vieques as a space of domination is tied to the US. Navy as a particular expression of capitalist. production, within the Western hemisphere, that took advantage of the geographical specificities of Puerto Rico and Vieques as US. colonial possessions. As we will see. this militarization of Vieques’ landscape has created a particular type of locality that. is suited for the neoliberal regime of capital accumulation. This militarization has also created the conditions under which another type of space. in this case oppositional. could emerge. This new space of resistance and hope is often reenacted through transnational social articulations for collective 89 actinll and solidarity. The production of Vieques. landsct’mes has to be understood as both: 1) an instance of capital "taking advantage of the specificities of conditions of productions” (Massey. 1991. 158) — particularly because Vieques’ location within the Cold War geopolitical regime was a. bastion against communism in the V\~"estern hemisphere — and. 2) as a space of colonial control. imposed on "the reality of the senses. of bodies. of wishes and desires" of people (Lel'ebvre. 1974. 139) "constantly enforced through the power of convention. . . . symbolism. [and] through . . . straightforward violence” (Massey. 1994. 189). This dttal spatial 1:)roduction contributes greatly not only to the constitution of particular place—based identities but. also of the very identity of Vieques as a. place. The aftermath of \‘Vorld War 11 not only brought many changes to world geopolitics but also witnessed the fight. of several former colonies for their independence, this is particularly true of many colonies in Africa. The main politico-economic alternatives were capitalism and comn‘nmism. D(‘.V€l()1)111(.’11t was presented as an option for these new nation states and through econcnnic growth they were invited to Share the ben- efits of the international system as sovereign countries. This option was built as an alternative in opposition to communism (Escobar. 1995). With communist Cuba. as a "(burger-ous" example for the Caribbean and Latin America. and with Nacionalista movements openly attacking U.S. colonialism. Puerto Rico became the perfect labo- ratory for the (ileveltn)ment alternative and indeed. the. island became “The cast of the Americas" through "Operation Bootstrap.” The negative social and economic conse- quences of such a project, are well documented in Puerto Rico (Rivera et al., 1983; Rivera. 1986; Pantt)jas—Garcie-t. 1990) but not so nntch the connections between the development project, and the military presence that some authors (O’Connor. 1973'. Ross. 1996: thIMl'dl'flgP. 1997) refer to as the military industrial complex. How is it that the literature that has been critically looking at. development in Latin America has overlooktw'l the US. military‘s im'olvement. in these modernist projects. especially when its presence has been so overwhelming? The case of Vieques should contribute to this gap in the. literatm'e. 9U The occupation of Vieques. among other military possessions. has played a pivotal role. in maintaining military and economic control over the Western Hemisphere. The US. interest. in cont rolling the \V'estern Hemisphere has a long history dating back to the end of the nineteenth century. However the historical conditions were never as favorable as they were during the Second World War. With the European powers at war. the US. was not only able to monopolize world markets with their commodities. but also strengthen and secure their presence in Latin America. This was not difficult given the fact that the British. the French and the Germans were too busy to attend to their economic interests and territorit-tl possessions. \\'it h the destruction of most of Europe. the aftermath of the war provided the US. with the oppcn‘tunity to establish itself as the dominant. power in the region. The aftermath also placed the Soviet Union as a world power. It is this cold war context and the historical interest of securing easy access to new markets and raw materials in the Western Hemisphere that explains the US. military policy towards Latin America. Among the first policies to secure this region was the Truman Doctrine. which marked the beginning of the cold war. The Truman Doctrine for Latin America resulted in the Inter-American Treaty of fict'iprocrt/ Assistant-c (1947). This treaty forced the signatories to align with the US. in the military defense of the \-\'estern Hemisphere (Rodriguez Beruff, 1988. 48). The .llu/uu/ .S’ccurz'lt/ Act (1951) further forced Latin American ccmntries to establish incipient military forces in order to “cmrtain” communism (Rodriguez Beruff. 1988. 47). It was not. however. until the arrival of the revoltitionary and national liberation struggles. during the sixties that this military infrastructure not only increased. but. also was openly aligned with a modernization project for Latin America. Following the reconmiendations of economic advisors such as \\'alt Rostow. the Ii’ennedg- Johnson m/mi-rr/stmi/mzs (1959-1908) created the Latin America foreign policy of pre- venting the emergence of ccnnpeting polit.ico—ectniomic models to that of the United States. Between 1950 and 1968. the United States through the Ilvfilitafly Assistance Frugal/n (1931). transferred a total of 687 million dollars in military assistance to Latin America (Rodrguez Beruff 1988. p. 52). As part of this “assistance” the US. 91 School of Americas trained more than 59. (190 Latin American military officials in counter-insurgencv intelligence (Rodriguez Beruff. 1988. 54). The path to develop— ment was the brutal rein‘ession and eradication of popular movements by intervening militarily and supporting dictatorial regimes that championed US. interests in the region. Hence. “tlevelopment" became the alternative to revolution. This meant that US. military forces l)(-.‘("("tlll(‘ the most effective instrumt—mt tailoring the modernist. project. in the region. 3.1.1 Puerto Rico: The Gibraltar of the Caribbean The militarization of the Caribbean landscape played a pivotal role within this mod- ernization project. Through most. of the twentieth century. the Panama Canal was an important military and economic stronghold for the United States. Naval con— trol over the (‘aribbean was necessary to protect this vital commercial and military route. Puerto Rico not only served this purpose. having the biggest. US. militz-n'y complex outside of the continental. US” bttt also served as the springboard from which most of the military policies and interventions in Latin America were carried out. Some of the US. Military interventions carried out from Puerto Rico included: 1954 Guatemala. 1959 \r’miezuela (military back up against Venezuelan demonstra- tors). l9(i‘2 Cuba (the naval quarantine). 1965 Dominican Republic. 1970 Trinidad. and 1983 Granada. Moreover. the "Gibraltar of the Caribbean." as the US. Navy used to consider Puerto Rico. became the showcase of devc—élopment for Latin America (Rodriguez Beruff. 1988. 21(5). The Second World War not only placed Puerto Rico as the US. Naval center of command in the Caribbean but indeed it made it part of the larger military plan of securing the Western Hemisphere for capitalist investments. \Ye can see this in the establishment of military regimes in most of Central .-‘\merica serving the purpose of protecting US. capital in the region. In the context of the Cold War the battle was not only military but also ideological. The US. need an antithesis to Cuba. thus the launching of the "Puerto Rican development model" as the alternative to the Cuban socialist eccmomic one (Rodriguez Berutf, 1988. 216-17). The Puerto Rican developinent model was based on an alin'upt. (.‘l‘iange from agro-export economy to one of industrial mamifacturing. The apparent rapid success of this model is explained by the great degree of ecmiomic dependency that made it possible (Rodriguez Beruff, 1988. 194-93). Since it was built on US. war economy. on large monetary influxes from the military. on large forced Puerto Rican migration to the US. and. on the obligatory draft of thcmsands of Puerto Ricans in the armed forces, it was a. model that could not be exported abroad as [")<’.>liticians claimed. In less than a decade, the inell’ectiveness of the model became evident. although discursively it served its purpose: to lure and often coerce Latin American (grountries into the US. modernist project. For Vieques. modernity meant. undergoing dramatic. social. environmental and epidemiolt)gical transformations. In 1911. the U S Navy expropriated two thirds of the lands on the island for military purposes. Prior the. expropriation. Vieques’ sugar cane economy attracted thousands of workers not only from the main island of Puerto Rico but from other Caribbean islands as well. Not only did Vieques economy decline due to this dramatic change in land use. but it also forced more than thirty thousand people to emigrate. The US. Navy constricted those who stayed to the remaining one third of the island. After more than sixty years of military 1')resence, Vieques’ population has neither grown — currently there is about. 9. 009 people inhabiting the island — nor has its economy recuperated — \iieques has the highest unenmloyment rate in Puerto Rico. In addition to serving as the spearhead of the US. modernist. project. in Latin America and as the watchdog for US. capitalist interests in the region. the US. Navy in Vieques also became a corporate capital entity in and of itself with global reach.1 Understanding the US. Navy as part of the military industrial complex allows us to see the way in which the landscapes of Vieques and the bodies of Puerto Ricans have been the sites of capital accumulation. The US. Navy in Vieques was part of the military industriz-tl complex in at least two interrelated ways: as part of the feed- 1President Eisenhower defined this amplified participation of the military forces into political and economical mattt-u's as the military industrial complex. 93 back—loop process of state/capital co-development and as a corporative capital entity in and of itself. The (('())(leveltipltlt‘llt of the state and capitalism in the United States is inextricably interwoven ((_)'Connor. 19725). As the work of O’Connor (1973) illustrates. capitalism (‘lesp<_~i'at<.*l_v needs goods and services provided by the state (which are treated as if they were commodities) in order to have. capital accumulation. Social capital expen- dit ures are not only welfare related (health. food. etc.) but also and most importantly warfare related. As ()‘Connor explains. the growth of the surplus population and surplus productive capacity is a single process. . . Thus the growth of state expenditures in the form of wel- fare expenses and warfare expenses is also a single process. . . Monopoly capital must create expanding markets (which it. can control) in order to utilize productive capacity that otherwise would be. idle. The his- torical solution has been the rapid expansion of overseas investment and trade. . . thus help prevent the wakening of monopolistic market structures at home. In turn. the growth of US. controlled world markets and invest— ment networks has required a worldwide military establishment, foreign aid and loan programs. and other imperial expenditures. Military and related spending also constitute social expenses of production to the de- gree that they are the effect. of the i'n'ocess of capital accumulation in the monopoly industries (O'Connor. 1973. ‘28) . This analysis still holds today in the face of structural adjustment. and neoliberal- ism. .-\s O‘Connor recently pointed out. the problem of the legitimation crisis of the state nowadays no longer requires the making of "pay offs” to “economic losers" but rather directs attention toward enabling "competitiveness in the global n‘iarketplace” ((.)‘Connor. 2002. :5). This analysis becomes even more relevant because the disman- tling of the "welfare state" in the US. implies. contrary to the neoliberal (‘liscourse even more involvement of the state in the global market. — through social capital expenditures in the military to absorbe surplus population. This is the reason why 94 the US. army is the major welfare system in place in the world. Paradoxically those in the. army are serving the ('torpm'ate interests, which in the first place created the conditions of more in1})(1iverishment (through a reduction in state social expenditures) that forced many economically marginalized tiieople to join the armed forces. If it is not surprising enough that 1/4 of the US fiscal budget is used on the military sector. it is even more surprising that after the pharmaceutical sector, the arms industry is the most 1*)rofitable of all US capitalist. enterprises with billions on weapons sold annually (Bandarage. 1997). It is clear then that the US. military apparatus is inseparably linked to private corporations and research oriented universities through tecliiio,r'st-iemific innovations. \"ieques has been an extremely important site for the military industrial complex as a corporate capite‘rl entity in and of itself in at least. four ways: 1. development and testing weapons. ‘2. exhibition and selling of weapons internationally. 3. renting of the land for other countries’ trz-tinings and .4. training of connnandos. DevelopmentI/testing: the US. Navy has been using Vieques since they invaded it for the development and testing of arms 1‘)rototypes. Because of the “national security character” of these experimentatitins. the information on the specific types of weapons tested on the island is not. public. Only rect-tntly, in the face of evidence that some researchers were able to gather during an opptn'tunity of having access to restricted terrains (because protesters took over these terrains for a whole year) the US. Navy was forced to admit. that they were firing arnior—piercing depleted uranium bombs (DU) in their air-to—ground and ship-to—shore bombing practices. Studies done by the \\'orld Health (..)rganizz-ttion (WHO) have linked the use of depleted uranium (U- 238) bombs with radical birth defects (i.e., babies born. without. heads or hearts. and with third limbs). as well as various forms of cancer. Moreover. environmental studies in Vieques have revealed the existence of a great deal of other contaminants also associated with cancer. such as metals. napalm. arsenic, lead. mercury. etc. For instance. .\lassol Deva and Diaz' (2003) study showed that crabs in the shooting area had 1000 times more cadmium than what. the. US-Food and Drug Administration considers safe for human consumpticm. Exhibition and selling of weapons: The island of Vieques has been used not. only for military przrtctices. which are a “matter of national security,” as the US Navy argues. but also as the site in which they show to potential liniyers the latest technology in weapons. \I'ieoues becomes in this way a kind of show room. which is consumed by the voyeuristic eyes of internaticmal buyers of weapons watching the US. Navy’s circus of destruction. Renting of the land: "whether a foreign buyer actually 1‘)urchases weapons from the. defense contractors after testing their weapons. the US. Navy still gets paid for the testing procedures to the tune of $85000 — $250000 per use of the island.” As Murillo (2001) has pointed out. "prior to 1999. the US. Navy descrilmd Vieques as “One- Stop Shopping" and "High on Return on Investment" on their website advertising the business benefits of testing military weaponry and procedures on the island” (Murillo. 2001). .\loreover. until recently. the US. Navy a