Using Smith for criticizing explanations to the Colombian situation

Daniel Rudas-Burgos Cultural and Social Bases of Education

Doctoral Student Professor Lambros Comitas
Anthropology and Education Teachers College, Columbia University
dr2868@tc.columbia.edu.co October 10th 2016

In Colombia, South America, there is a 52 years old armed conflict. One of the

contenders is a guerrilla called FARC. During the last four years, the government has been

negotiating a peace deal with FARC. Last August 24th, they finally reached an agreement

(Gobierno Nacional & FARC-EP, 2016). However, on October 2nd, Colombian people rejected

the agreement in a plebiscite (RNEC, 2015). After that, thousands of people are in the streets

demonstrating support to the agreement (El Tiempo, 2016); Colombian President was awarded

with the Nobel Peace Prize (Nobelprize.org, 2016); and the truce with FARC is hanging by a

thread (Brodzinsky, 2016).

In newspapers and social media, there are people trying to explain this complex situation.

There are those who say that the rejection of the agreement was caused by the leadership of a

right-wing former president (J. L. Anderson, 2016). Other people say that Colombians cannot

forgive (Semple & Casey, 2016) or that they are easily cheated by misleading publicity (Alsema,

2016). Interestingly, well educated people say the cause of the rejection was, precisely, low

levels of education (De Zubiría, 2016).

These explanations attracted my attention because they are similar to the ones that

Michael Garfield Smith (1998) criticizes in the first chapter of his book The Study of Social

Stucture. For Smith, early thinkers assumed that human societies were homogeneous and well

delimited units1, when clearly societies are diverse and plural. In my view, most of the

1
With the exception of Ibn Kaldûn, who emphasized in the dynamics of human conflict.
USING SMITH FOR CRITICIZING EXPLANATIONS TO THE COLOMBIAN 2
SITUATION

explanations about the situation in Colombia assumed that the country is a homogeneous social

system, with an internal conflict caused by a malfunction in the system. I prefer to consider the

country as a cultural imagination (following the explanation given by B. Anderson, 2006) which

is formed by a pluralistic group of human beings, in mutual relationships and perpetual conflict.

Smith states that Montesquieu, Marx and Comte took into account social change and

conflict. They established that certain elements of social systems were so fundamental, that they

became structural. For these authors, modifications in social structures like geography, ways of

production or ideologies ― respectively ― explained social change. It seems to me that most of

the explanations of the Colombian situation are based in the assumption that there is an

ideological structure2, even if those explanations are not based in Comte. In any case, according

to Smith, this kind of explanations are problematic, mainly because it is impossible to validate

the relevance of a single sequence of causes and effects. For example, we can argue that the

Colombian plebiscite occurred because of the existence of democracy in the country during the

19th century. Then we can trace the origin of democracy until Greece. However, how can we

prove that the connection between democracy in Greece and the situation in Colombia is more

relevant than other possible causes (for example, education, publicity or leadership)? According

to Smith, there is not a clear methodology for doing so.

At the end of the chapter, Smith outlined his own proposal for studying societies, which,

according to himself, solves the problem. The method consists in isolating social units, looking

for their principles and figuring out its logical requisites (an idea inspired by Weber). As a

Colombia citizen, my question is: Is it possible to use Smith’s theory for understanding the

situation of Colombia?
2
Of course, Marxism is a main source of explanations for different kinds of situations in Colombia. Michael
Taussig (1977), for example, used Marxist theories for explaining magical practices among Colombian peasants
during the industrialization of cane production. For him, a change of ways of production produced a shift in the
value of goods (from use value to exchange value) and peasants were resisting the change using their own logic.
USING SMITH FOR CRITICIZING EXPLANATIONS TO THE COLOMBIAN 3
SITUATION

References

Alsema, A. (2016, October 6). Colombia’s opposition admits to purposely distorting reality to
sink peace process. Retrieved October 10, 2016, from
http://colombiareports.com/colombias-opposition-admits-purposely-distorting-reality-
sink-peace-process/
Anderson, B. (2006). Imagined communities: Reflections on the origin and dpread of
nationalism (First published in 1983). New York: Verso.
Anderson, J. L. (2016, October 4). How Colombia’s Voters Rejected Peace. Retrieved October
10, 2016, from http://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/how-colombias-voters-
rejected-peace
Brodzinsky, S. (2016, October 5). Colombia alerts Farc rebels to end of ceasefire after failed
peace referendum. Retrieved October 10, 2016, from
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/oct/05/colombia-farc-ceasefire-end-
referendum-peace-deal
De Zubiría, J. (2016, October 6). El triunfo del NO y el fracaso de la educación colombiana.
Retrieved October 10, 2016, from
http://www.semana.com/educacion/articulo/implicaciones-del-no/497863
El Tiempo. (2016, October 5). Multitudinaria manifestación por la paz llenó la plaza de Bolívar.
Retrieved October 10, 2016, from http://www.eltiempo.com/colombia/otras-
ciudades/marchas-por-la-paz-en-colombia/16719248
Gobierno Nacional, & FARC-EP. (2016, August 24). Acuerdo final para la terminación del
conflicto y la construcción de una paz estable y duradera. Retrieved September 15, 2016,
from
https://www.mesadeconversaciones.com.co/sites/default/files/24_08_2016acuerdofinalfin
alfinal-1472094587.pdf
Nobelprize.org. (2016, October 7). The Nobel Peace Prize 2016 – Press Release [The Norwegian
Nobel Committee]. Retrieved October 10, 2016, from
https://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2016/press.html
RNEC. (2015, October 2). Plebiscito 2 Octubre 2016: Boletín Nacional 53 [Registraduría
Nacional del Estado Civil, República de Colombia]. Retrieved October 10, 2016, from
http://plebiscito.registraduria.gov.co/99PL/DPLZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ_L1.htm
Semple, K., & Casey, N. (2016, October 3). Deep Scars and Complacency Defeated Colombia’s
Peace Deal. Retrieved October 10, 2016, from
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/04/world/americas/colombia-rebels-farc-santos-
uribe.html
Smith, M. G. (1998). Issues in the legacy (Chapter 1). In The Study of Social Structure (pp. 1–
47). New York: Research Institute for the Study of Man.
Taussig, M. (1977). The Genesis of Capitalism Among a South American Peasantry: Devil’s
Labor and the Baptism of Money. Comparative Studies in Society and History, 19(2),
130–155.