7/30/2019 Caciquismo - Definition

1/4

CACIQUISMOFrom "Encyclopedia of Mexico: History, Society & Culture"

In general speech, the term is applied to any individual who exercises power over others in a despotic and arbitrarycaciquefashion. indicates the dominion established by this type of leaderthe exercise of a real power through illegalCaciquismocoercion and the appointment and manipulation of formal authorities. Such control is carried out in an extralegal fashion, basedon the control of the most important strategic resources (political, economic, and cultural) and through frequent recourse tophysical force.

English-speaking authors have debated the specificity of the term and the usefulness of employing it to indicatecaciquesomething more than a (local political boss). Even though some authors have used both terms without making ajefe poltico localdistinction, the prevailing opinion has been that refers to a specific type of political activity.caciquismo

The detailed treatment of in sociological literature has emphasized its most important characteristics. Pablo GonzlezcaciquismoCasanova has insisted that this form of authoritarianism implies total control over wealth, honor, public office, and politicalpower. Moreover, the is both owner and master of his territory and the life and destiny of its inhabitants. He has morecaciquepower in his region than any other more formally established political organization. In a similar fashion, Paul Friedrich definedthe as a strong and autocratic leader in regional and local politics whose power to command, characteristicallycaciqueinformal, individualist and frequently arbitrary, is backed up by a nucleus of family members, fighters and dependents, and isparticularly characterized by the use of threats and the exercise of violence. To these characteristics Antonio Ugalde has addedpolitical control over a geographical area and the potential use of violence, the recognition and legitimacy established on the axisbetween accord with his authority and the support of external political leaders. Luisa Par gave the term to a form ofcaciquismopolitical control in rural areas typical of a period when capitalism is penetrating noncapitalist modes of production. According toPar, during such a time traditional authority based on a representation of collective interests within a community tends todisappear in favor of an individual or group of individuals who act as the main agents for capitalist penetration in a givencommunity. Recent literature on local politics and has insisted on its role as a form of political intermediation whichcaciquismohas enormous relevance in the process of the creation of the Mexican state.

The History ofCaciquismo

The term is derived from kassicuan, a word in Arawak (the language of an indigenous Caribbean people) meaning tocaciquehave or keep a house. The first recorded use of the term comes from the diary of Christopher Columbus, who heard it after hisdisembarking in Hispaniola, when it was used to describe the chief or lord of the indigenous Tanos people with whom he dealt.The Spanish conquistadors employed the term to indigenous leaders and to aboriginal chieftainships.cacique cacicazgo

During the colonial period, consisted in the Spanish Crowns recognition of certain indigenous titles and privileges ascacicazgowell as particular rights and obligations that were assigned to those Indian leaders who were identified as belonging to theaboriginal nobility. This investiture was rather more formal than actual, eventually becoming an institution of indirectgovernment, a means of mediating between conquerors and conquered.

In Spain, the term , apart from referring to the chieftainship of an indigenous village or people, is also applied to thecacicazgoexcessive use of influence in public affairs. In this sense it becomes a label for extralegal means of control of electoral resultsbased on influence and pressure exercised by strongmen backed by state administrative apparatuses at the local level. Thispolitical institution predominated in rural Spain during the first third of the nineteenth century and the first third of thetwentieth century in relation to living conditions in the country.

In Independent Mexico, which sought to foster a direct, unmediated relationship between the citizen and the state, colonialwas destroyed by liberal anti-corporatism, which sought to foster a direct, unmediated relationship between the citizencacicazgo

and the state. The term survived nevertheless, but identified with the exercise of a personal, autocratic leadership that waslocally powerful but held a monopoly on links with the outside world, particularly with regard to public authority.

During the last third of the nineteenth century, both the erosion of local government and the institution of political bosses duringthe Porfiriato led to order on a local level depending on authorities nominated from Mexico City who seemed tyrannical, despotic,and arbitrary to the local inhabitants. The terms , and all reappeared in this context. Thus a largecacique, cacicazgo caciquismopercentage of the local rebellions that led to the Revolution of 1910 originated to combat the tyranny of the . During thecaciquesRevolution, bandits and rebels first obtained local political control. In the process they too became regional , therebycaciquesfreeing themselves from the control of the central authorities.

in Modern Mexican HistoryCaciquismo

The role of the regional that emerged from the Revolution was decisive in the formation of the post-Revolutionarycaciques

7/30/2019 Caciquismo - Definition

2/4

Mexican state. The way in which the activities of these regional leaders linked with the process of state consolidation has been aconstant theme in the studies on Mexican history and politics. The most important regional leaders included individuals such asDmasco Crdenas, Primo Tapia, and Francisco Mgica in Michoacn; Adalberto Tejeda and Cndido Aguilar in Veracruz; TomsGarrido Canabal in Tabasco; Saturnino Cedillo and Gonzalo Santos in San Luis Potos; Felipe Carillo Puerto in the Yucatn; theFigueroa clan in Guerrero; and Jos Guadalupe Zuno in Jalisco.

Many of these leaders came to power in regions that had no large or spontaneous (peasant) revolts during thecampesinoRevolutionary conflict. The mobilization in favor of agrarian distribution benefited from an important ingredient:campesinoexternal organization that needed the formation of nuclei of intermediaries with extra-regional contacts. Here the role of thelocal proved decisive. Minor local developed in direct relation with regional leaders, basing their local politicalcaciques caciques

control on their ties to hierarchical systems of patronage. The best documented case is that of Carrillo Puerto in the Yucatn.However, studies on and regional power in Michoacn also clearly illustrate this phenomenon. Cases such as that ofcaciquismothe Prado family in La Caada de los Once Pueblos, the Ruiz brothers in Taretan, Martnez and Zavala Cisneros in thenorth-central area, or Dmaso Crdenas in La Cinaga de Chapala are relevant.

The participation of these local strongmen was decisive in the initial stages of the construction of the post-Revolutionary Mexicanstate. Even though rural areas were the privileged locus of action, their role in the cities also has been relevant. The later growthof the state political and administrative apparatus led to conflict with and, to a large extent, the dissolution of these .cacicazgosThe centralist political organization severely limited the autonomous bases of the regional to the point that it destroyedcaciquestheir sources of independent power, the availability of armed forces, and their privileged access to state resources. At the sametime their guarantees of security and the satisfaction of material necessities mediated by the became tied to the controlcaciquesand dependency of their clientele in relation to the state. Although in many cases the process made the presence of the caciqueunnecessary, it institutionalized mediation as a means to exchange support for guarantees and benefits that favored the state. Inthis sense the were a fundamental element in the establishment of the client-based character of the Mexican politicalcaciques

system.

and Political IntermediationCaciquismo

The role of as a means of intermediation has been emphasized from various analytical points of view. Luisa Par seescaciquismoas a phenomenon of intermediation apparent where there are situations in which links are to be made betweencaciquismo

different means of production. In this context it is the requisite mechanism for the implanting of capitalism in a non-capitalistenvironment. Historically this process occurred with multiple regional variations. Nevertheless in general it is presented as astructuring process for local power whereby popular leaders personally benefit from the strong support of their followers bymediating their demands. Through this process they become . The centralist political apparatus favored this transition,caciquesonce the pressures of the system had largely been eased by the co-option and corruption of the local leaders, before attending tothe demands of the group these represented. This cooptation favored the economic aspect of the mediation. Thecaciques

generally made a profit from the introduction of progress and modernity, along with goods and services introducedcaciqueinto his areas of control. At the same time he appropriated resources removed by diverse means from the people under his rule.

These activities included the direct exploitation of and , various forms of usury, illegitimate use ofcampesinos jornaleroscommunity possessions, the exploitation of labor on a community and cooperative basis, as well as speculation and corruption.These activities required political control to bring to fruition. Thus, though the interest of the was the maintenance ofcaciquecontrol outside the economic field, political interests came first on many occasions. From this perspective, the ascaciqueintermediary in a process of control mixes in the political advantages that he needs to obtain economic benefits. Hence the

intermediary position is of equal relevance in both political and economic spheres.caciques

The is thus placed in two distinct realities and takes advantage of his skills and structural position to make connections.caciqueIn Eric Wolfs terminology, a in his role as political intermediary protects the links or points of communication thatcaciqueconnect the local system with a wider society. The economic role of the institution is less relevant in this case. Most important isthat the intermediary acts as a connecting link between different levels of contact. If these levels are defined in terms of powerdifferences, one must analyze how they are exercised. The intermediary is looking for power on two levels; he manipulates thecontrol he has on one to strengthen his position with regard to the other. Thus the control he holds in each sphere depends onthe success with which he maintains control over the other.

Following this line of argument, Guillermo de la Pea has proposed that should be understood within the context ofcaciquismothe relationship between the dual process of the creation of the state and the creation of the nation. He states that given that theproject of consolidation on a state level demands the disappearance of alternative powers within its territory, the state makes useof political intermediaries to generate or increase the dependency of individuals who manifest a degree of independence. On theother hand, the process of national consolidation brings with it the establishment of a symbolic universe of connections that aregenerally accepted and shared by all members of the nation. This implies an important transculturation of those segments of thepopulation that have to unify the nation, which frequently forces a redefinition and reorganization of these connecting levels. Theintermediaries create the points of connection between their base sector and the rest of society, aiming to assure a specificbehavior pattern from the population in particular areas, in exchange for expected benefits. play an important part inCaciquesthis process since they maintain their own activities and obtain personal benefits through obligatory monopolies on certainchannels of access.

7/30/2019 Caciquismo - Definition

3/4

See alsoCaudillismo

Select Bibliography

Bartra, Roger, et al., Caciquismo y poder poltico en el Mxico Rural. , Mexico City: , .8th edition Siglo XXI 1986Brading, David, editor, Caudillo and Peasant in the Mexican Revolution. Cambridge and New York: ,Cambridge University Press

.1980de la Pea, Guillermo, In Poder local, poder regional, edited byPoder local, poder regional: perspectivas socio-antropolgicas.

and . Mexico City: , .Padua, Jorge Vanneph, Alain Colegio de Mxico-CEMCA 1986Friedrich, Paul, In Local-Level Politics: Social and Cultural Perspectives, edited by .The Legitimacy of a Cacique. Swartz, Marc J.Chicago: , .Aldine 1968Kern, Robert, editor, The Caciques: Oligarchical Politics and the System of Caciquismo in the Luso-Hispanic World. Albuquerque:

, .University of New Mexico Press 1973Martinez Assad, Carlos, editor, Estadistas, caciques y caudillos. Mexico City: , .UNAM-IIS 1988Salmern Castro, Fernando I., Revista Mexicana de CienciasCaciques: Una revisin terica sobre el control poltico local.Polticas y Sociales ( ).30 1984

FERNANDO I. SALMERN CASTRO

Copyright 1997 by FITZROY DEARBORN PUBLISHERS

7/30/2019 Caciquismo - Definition

4/4

Persistent URL to this entry: http://www.credoreference.com/entry/routmex/caciquismo

APA. (1998). In . Retrieved fromCACIQUISMO Encyclopedia of Mexico: History, Society & Culture

http://www.credoreference.com/entry/routmex/caciquismo

Chicago, s.v. " ," accessed June 27, 2013,Encyclopedia of Mexico: History, Society & Culture CACIQUISMO

http://www.credoreference.com/entry/routmex/caciquismo

Harvard 1998, in , Routledge, London, United Kingdom, viewed 27CACIQUISMO Encyclopedia of Mexico: History, Society & Culture

June 2013,

MLA" ." . London: Routledge, 1998. . Web. 27CACIQUISMO Encyclopedia of Mexico: History, Society & Culture Credo Reference

June 2013.