Bolivar’s ‘Jamaica Letter’
Translated by Lewis Bertrand in Selected Writings of Bolivar, (New York:
The colonial Press Inc.,1951)
Background:
Simon Bolivar, (1783-1830) the most
renowned leader of the Latin American independence movement, is known
throughout Latin America as “El Libertador: (“The Liberator”). He was born to a wealthy Venezuelan
landowning family in 1783. Orphaned at
an early age, he was educated by a private tutor who inspired in his pupil an
enthusiasm for the principles of the Enlightenment and republicanism. After spending three years in Europe, Bolivar
returned to New Spain in 1803, where the death of his new bride plunged him into
grief and caused his return to France and Italy. In 1805 in Rome he took a vow to dedicate his
life to the liberation of his native land.
On his return in 1807 to Venezuela he became a leading member of the
republican-minded group in Caracas that in 1808 began to agitate for
independence and in 1810 deposed the colonial governor and in 18ll declared
independence. Until his death in 1830, Bolivar dedicated himself to the Latin
American independence movement as a publicist, diplomat, theoretician, and statesman. His greatest contribution was as the general
who led the armies that defeated the Spaniards and liberated the northern
regions of South America.
The
so-called Jamaica Letter is one of the most famous political manifestoes, it
was written by Simon in 1815 during the self-imposed exile in Jamaica. It was addressed to “an English gentlemen,”
probably the island’s governor, the Duke of Manchester. Its optimistic outlook is all the more
remarkable in that it was written at the low point of the struggle against
Spain. The Venezuelan Republic had
collapsed in May as a result of a viciously fought Spanish counteroffensive,
divisions among the revolutionaries, and opposition from many Indians. Blacks,
and mulattos, who viewed the Creole landowners, not the Spaniards, as their
oppressors.
The ideas he expressed here for the
reorganization of the states of Latin America were ones that he attempted to
put into practice during his years of power as president of Peru, Colombia, and
Bolivia.
The letter was written in response to a
request from the Englishman for Bolivar’s thoughts about the background and
prospects of the liberation movement.
Note: additional comments – When Napoleon
conquered Spain the hold that Spain had on Venezuela and other Latin American
countries was loosened. Bolivar assumed
leadership of the revolution first in Venezuela and then in New Granada, a
large territory comprised of what is modern-day Colombia, Ecuador, Peru, and
Bolivia. In 1819, Bolivar’s army
defeated the Spanish forces in a portion of New Granada and he declared the
liberated territory the Republic of Colombia.
The fighting against Spain continued for another six years before upper
Peru was finally won. The territory was
renamed Bolivia in his honor.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kingston, Jamaica, September 6,
1815.
My dear Sir:
With what a feeling of gratitude I read
that passage in your letter in which you say to me: "I hope that the
success which then followed Spanish arms may now turn in favor of their
adversaries, the badly oppressed people of South America." I take this
hope as a prediction, if it is justice that determines man's contests. Success
will crown our efforts, because the destiny of America has been irrevocably
decided; the tie that bound her to Spain has been severed. Only a concept
maintained that tie and kept the parts of that immense monarchy together. That
which formerly bound them now divides them. The hatred that the Peninsula has
inspired in us is greater than the ocean between us. It would be easier to have
the two continents meet than to reconcile the spirits of the two countries. The
habit of obedience; a community of interest, of understanding, of religion;
mutual goodwill; a tender regard for the birthplace and good name of our
forefathers; in short, all that gave rise to our hopes, came to us from Spain.
As a result there was born principle of affinity that seemed eternal,
notwithstanding the misbehavior of our rulers which weakened that sympathy, or,
rather, that bond enforced by the domination of their rule. At present the
contrary attitude persists: we are threatened with the fear of death, dishonor,
and every harm; there is nothing we have not suffered at the hands of that
unnatural stepmother-Spain. The veil has been torn asunder. We have already
seen the light, and it is not our desire to be thrust back into darkness…
The role of the inhabitants of the American
hemisphere has for centuries been purely passive. Politically they were
nonexistent. We are still in a position lower than slavery, and therefore it is
more difficult for us to rise to the enjoyment of freedom…States are slaves
because of either the nature or the misuse of their constitutions; a people is
therefore enslaved when the government, by its nature or its vices, infringes
on and usurps the rights of the citizen or subject. Applying these principles,
we find that America was denied not only its freedom but even an active and
effective tyranny. Let me explain. Under absolutism there are no recognized
limits to the exercise of governmental powers. The will of the great sultan,
khan, bey, and other despotic rulers is the supreme law, carried out more or
less arbitrarily by the lesser pashas, khans, and satraps of Turkey and Persia,
who have an organized system of oppression in which inferiors participate
according to the authority vested in them. To them is entrusted the
administration of civil, military, political, religious, and tax matters. But,
after all is said and done, the rulers of Isfahan are Persians; the viziers of
the Grand Turk are Turks; and the sultans of Tartary are Tartars.
How different is our situation! We have
been harassed by a conduct which has not only deprived us of our rights but has
kept us in a sort of permanent infancy with regard to public affairs. If we
could at least have managed our domestic affairs and our internal
administration, we could have acquainted ourselves with the processes and
mechanics of public affairs. We should also have enjoyed a personal
consideration, thereby commanding a certain unconscious respect from the
people, which is so necessary to preserve amidst revolutions. That is why I say
we have even been deprived of an active tyranny, since we have not been
permitted to exercise its functions.
Americans today, and perhaps to a greater
extent than ever before, who live within the Spanish system occupy a position
in society no better than that of serfs destined for labor, or at best they
have no more status than that of mere consumers. Yet even this status is
surrounded with galling restrictions, such as being forbidden to grow European
crops, or to store products which are royal monopolies, or to establish
factories of a type the Peninsula itself does not possess. To this add the
exclusive trading privileges, even in articles of prime necessity, and the
barriers between American provinces, designed to prevent all exchange of trade,
traffic, and understanding. In short, do you wish to know what our future
held?--simply the cultivation of the fields of indigo, grain, coffee, sugar
cane, cacao, and cotton; cattle raising on the broad plains; hunting wild game
in the jungles; digging in the earth to mine its gold--but even these
limitations could never satisfy the greed of Spain.
So negative was our existence that I can
find nothing comparable in any other civilized society, examine as I may the
entire history of time and the politics of all nations. Is it not an outrage
and a violation of human rights to expect a land so splendidly endowed, so
vast, rich, and populous, to remain merely passive?
As I have just explained, we were cut off
and, as it were, removed from the world in relation to the science of
government and administration of the state. We were never viceroys or governors,
save in the rarest of instances; seldom archbishops and bishops; diplomats
never; as military men, only subordinates; as nobles, without royal privileges.
In brief, we were neither magistrates nor financiers and seldom merchants--all
in flagrant contradiction to our institutions.
It is harder, Montesquieu has written, to
release a nation from servitude than to enslave a free nation. This truth is
proven by the annals of all times, which reveal that most free nations have
been put under the yoke, but very few enslaved nations have recovered their
liberty. Despite the convictions of history, South Americans have made efforts
to obtain liberal, even perfect, institutions, doubtless out of that instinct
to aspire to the greatest possible happiness, which, common to all men, is
bound to follow in civil societies founded on the principles of justice,
liberty, and equality. But are we capable of maintaining in proper balance the
difficult charge of a republic? Is it conceivable that a newly emancipated people
can soar to the heights of liberty, and, unlike Icarus, neither have its wings
melt nor fall into an abyss? Such a marvel is inconceivable and without
precedent. There is no reasonable probability to bolster our hopes.
More than anyone, I desire to see America fashioned into the
greatest nation in the world, greatest not so much by virtue of her area and
wealth as by her freedom and glory. Although I seek perfection for the
government of my country, I cannot persuade myself that the New World can, at
the moment, be organized as a great republic. Since it is impossible, I dare
not desire it; yet much less do I desire to have all America a monarchy because
this plan is not only impracticable but also impossible. Wrongs now existing
could not be righted, and our emancipation would be fruitless. The American
states need the care of paternal governments to heal the sores and wounds of
despotism and war. . .
From the foregoing, we can draw these conclusions: The American
provinces are fighting for their freedom, and they will ultimately succeed.
Some provinces as a matter of course will form federal and some central
republics; the larger areas will inevitably establish monarchies, some of which
will fare so badly that they will disintegrate in either present or future
revolutions. To consolidate a great monarchy will be no easy task, but it will
be utterly impossible to consolidate a great republic.
When success is not assured, when the state is weak, and when
results are distantly seen, all men hesitate; opinion is divided, passions
rage, and the enemy fans these passions in order to win an easy victory because
of them. As soon as we are strong and under the guidance of a liberal nation
which will lend us her protection, we will achieve accord in cultivating the
virtues and talents that lead to glory. Then will we march majestically toward
that great prosperity for which South America is destined.
I am, Sir, etc., etc.
Questions