America's Colony: The Political and Cultural Conflict between the United States and Puerto Rico

3. Puerto Rican Political Culture

Puerto Rican Political Culture Native-born (puertorriqueña/o) political thinking in the island is determined by the relationship between Puerto Rico and the current colonial power advocated by each person or political group. In Puerto Rico this is commonly referred to as the “status issue.” Politics and political views are just as much a part of “culture,” as that term is used here, as is any other element of daily life or a personal belief system, and it is even truer in a colonial context. This chapter addresses Puerto Rico’s political culture, political thinking, and political parties, starting with their history and ideology. Some ignorant observers argue that Puerto Ricans themselves are politically confused. For example, Raymond Carr stated: The deep sense of frustration that haunts Puerto Rico is self-induced. Congress will not act as long as the democratic process in Puerto Rico gives no clear indication of the status Puerto Ricans wish to enjoy. . . . “Divide and rule” was the classic device for the maintenance of colonial rule. The United States does not need to foster it. The Puerto Ricans divide themselves.1 But the reality is that for more than two hundred years, Puerto Ricans have endured, and been marked by, the frustration that no matter how sophisticated their political thinking or organizing is, ultimately their lives continue to be dominated by the colonial power. This means that the politics of two large overseas nations—first Spain and now the United States—controls the political past, present, and future of the island and its residents. Political activism in Puerto Rico has been characterized by the limitations imposed and the contradictory messages sent by the colonial governments regarding the status choices available to Puerto Ricans. This has 3 49 consistently resulted in the criminalization of pro-independence activities and the legitimacy of anti-independence violence that is either initiated or sanctioned by the government. Paradoxically, at the same time Puerto Ricans have been denied full citizenship and equal participation in the “national ” political processes of the colonial nation. While Puerto Ricans talk to one another about the future status of their island, from the perspective of the colonial power the only available alternative to absolute colonial rule has always been the extremely unclear and democratically unsatisfactory “middle-ground” status imposed by the Charter of Autonomy and the current estado libre asociado (commonwealth). Three types of political-status ideologies have prevailed throughout the history of Puerto Rico’s two colonies. Separatists, nationalists, or independentistas (independence supporters), favor sovereignty, that is, separation from the colonial power and complete independence for the Puerto Rican nation. Liberals, autonomists, or estadolibristas (supporters of the estado libre asociado, free associated state), favor varying forms of home rule that include a permanent legal and political relationship with the colonial power. Conservatives, republicans, integrationists, assimilationists , or estadistas (statehooders), favor becoming a full part of the colonial power’s political organization as part of Spain during the first colony, or entry into the union as a state under U.S. rule.2 But political lines are not always entirely consistent, and there is a diversity of opinion within the three general movements ranging from “liberal ” to “conservative,” as those terms are commonly used in political discourse in the United States. Moreover, fundamental differences about specific aspects of the status option or how it should be achieved often produce political fractures within these movements. The goal of each political movement is relatively clear for independence and for statehood supporters, but not so clear for the commonwealth advocates. Much like the different forms of autonomy in regard to Spain, the definition of the commonwealth’s prerogatives relative to the power of the U.S. government varies today in the different factions within that movement. The other status tendencies usually differ as well. Independence supporters range from social conservatives to socialists (and perhaps even an occasional Marxist). While the overwhelming majority of pro-independence supporters favor a legal and democratic path to independence, some marginal groups have advocated and resorted to violence (although on balance, the independence movement has mostly 50 | Puerto Rican Political Culture been the object of violent repression). Statehood supporters differ internally on the degree to which Americanization (the cultural reconstruction of Puerto Rico to be “American”) should be a prerequisite to or the result of statehood. While some statehooders have been willing to surrender their cultural identity in exchange for statehood...