Caudillismo is a political system instituted not by ideas and laws, but by individuals and their personal authority. The original caudillos were those provincial leaders who opposed the creole urban elite, often educated in Spain, who sought to concentrate power in Buenos Aires following the displacement of the old masters in the aftermath of the 1810 revolution.
The caudillos were stereotyped as ignorant gauchos personifying barbarism and as representing the provincial interests of backward peoples. But with such historical roots their modern counterparts are admired for the way they use their personal authority to evade the law and assert their power over it. In the highly hierarchical culture of the River Plate it is accepted that Fate has given the individual caudillo “genius”, freeing him to rule on the basis of his superiority. As such he is above the law - every kind of law: traffic, tax and labour laws. Lacking is a sense of civic responsibility and accountability.
Weiss sees Carlos Menem, president of Argentina till 1999, as a modern caudillo, exemplified this when he refused to accept that a shining red Ferrari gifted to him by an Italian manufacturer belonged to the state. He even said, “People follow me because I am a transgressing president” and on one occasion drove this car from Buenos Aires to Mar del Plata at over 130 miles an hour.
The institution of concubinage (perhaps to some extent fading along with societal changes) is another expression of caudillismo, which goes hand in glove with a culture of el vivo (”the alive one”). This is a culture expressing aversion to hard work, highly valuing loyalty to one’s friends as the way to get things done. In this culture the individual seeks to take advantage of situations and become a person who establishes superiority by the dispensing of favours to others.
It is the ties of friendship that are the root of society, more binding than family bonds. There is no privacy with friends and no secrets. This is associated with a willingness to make new friends, extend hospitality and express compassion and generosity. This nobility, termed la nobleza gaucho, unlike nobleza oblige, from which it is derived, is not “blue blood” nobilit. Nor is it a nobility which has reference to economic or political power. Rather it is the nobility of the gaucho, “the generous, hospitable, helpful, compassionate dweller of the pampas who has suffered much on account of his unpretentiousness” (Weiss).
However, the very same friendship circle, the camarilla (those who share the closet), serves to reinforce the culture of seeking to live above the law.
Weiss is part of a project to consider how Paul looks from other cultural perspectives, an attempt made in Cross-Cultural Paul by Cosgrove, Weiss and Yeo. Accordingly, Weiss seeks to determine a response on the basis of Paul’s teaching, noting such things as:
- The hierarchical constitution of Paul’s universe (1 Cor 15:28; Rom 13:1-2; 1 Cor 11:3).
- Freedom exists in relationships and is dependent on power. So the circle of relationships is critically important.
- Living above the law or ignoring law is lawlessness.
- A just society and true human communities are Spirit produced and call for the pursuit of love.
- Compliance with God’s will is not the same as compliance with law.
- Everybody is personally accountable for the way they use their minds. The responsible use of reason presupposes following agreed-upon rules. Here Weiss seems to devote an inordinate amount of space to show the stock Paul places in the rational use of the mind.
- Such a stress on a reasoned lifestyle is at odds with the emotional basis for the appeal of caudillos, the predisposition to admire “superior” individuals.
- Christians can’t put themselves first and Weiss stresses what he calls “the power of love”. Paul trusts the power of the mind capable of being shaped by the Spirit and love. But he does not endorse living above the law.
- The innate compassion and hospitality of the gaucho is seen as congenial to Paul’s teaching, though friendship is not fellowship. Weiss notes that “the mind of the caudillo, or el vivo, which seeks his own good in an autonomous way, makes impossible the consolidation of a community. It rather works toward the formation of cliques, which Paul explicitly decries (1 Cor. 1:12).
A few additional points are worth making:
After the revolution of 1810 the social system was in ferment. Romans 13:1ff is of dubious application to the original caudillos since they themselves were recognised provincial leaders. Consequently, though these persons opposed the new authorities in Buenos Aires it is somewhat artificial on this basis to regard caudillos as persons who are above the law. The question being asked here was what set of laws or system of authority should people be subject to.
It is precarious to conflate societal law with biblical law. For Christians to submit to the governing authorities does not necessarily equate with legalistic compliance with all societal laws. Here submission means “ranking oneself under”. Christians are to respect and honour the governing authorities, not because of any innate worthiness in those who govern (this may be far from the case!), but because of their conviction that their Lord is sovereign over such governments. While such subordination rules out sedition and blatant rebellion, it is not inconsistent with such submission for Christians to use their common sense and good judgment when it comes to the issue of compliance, e.g. parking the car in a no stopping zone to help a person injured in a car accident. Christians need to understand their obligations to government and discharge them as good citizens, e.g. paying taxes. But - and I know this statement will be controversial (Christians, perhaps wanting to err on the side of caution, tend to be legalistic on this issue in my experience) - there is a real sense in which not merely caudillos but even Christians are “above the law”.
An example here might help to clarify my point. Consider Jesus’ response when the Pharisees criticised him for allowing his disciples, by picking the heads of grain, to break the Sabbath law. Among other points made by Jesus in his reply Jesus made this striking comment: “The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath” (Mark 2:27). The law is not an end in itself, but a means to an end. It is not hard to see how this principle can be abused, but it remains the principle for all that. Further, if this is true for biblical law then it must be all the more true for societal laws. So I don’t hesitate to park my car in the “No Stopping” zone to help an injured person because the no stopping law is there for the sake of people, not the other way round. So I put people first. Indeed, here is a useful control factor for Christians to use in assessing when living “above the law” is appropriate: Does this action genuinely put people first?
I must emphasise in all this that I am not countenancing wanton disregard for societal law and that it is imperative for Christians as they rank themselves under governing authorities to so live and act as those who sincerely express honour to those authorities. A good control factor here is provided by acceding to Paul’s urgings in 1 Timothy 2:1ff, that is, by diligently praying “for kings and all those in authority”.
It is the failure to accommodate such considerations that blunts the force of Weiss’ critique of “above the law” lifestyles in River Plate culture. Accepting Weiss’ analysis (apart from which I freely concede I know nothing about River Plate culture), the central point at which the Lordship of Christ involves confrontation with el vivo culture seems to revolve around the question as to the meaning of life. For the individual in River Plate culture it seems to be one of making the best of this life, exploiting opportunities to this end. When Christ becomes the Lord of one’s life then life is lived to please him and glorify God and this necessarily involves a radical transformation of relationships. Presumably, Latin American Christians may still be part of camarillas, but when sin is aired in the context of such a circle of friendship the Christian, as a true friend, must confront that sin in the name of Christ - be it ever so graciously - as he or she seeks to bring every thought captive to obey Christ (2 Corinthians 10:5).
Posted October 6, 2008
Upon clicking 'Buy now' you will be redirected to paypal.com where you can securely and quickly complete your purchase with a few clicks.
Immediately after payment at PayPal you will be redirected to a download page which
provides you instant access to your purchase.
