Si Se Puede, Yes We Can : January 2009

By Leigh Hardy

 

The political slogan “Yes We Can” has contextualized my understanding of democracy since I was born, but in its original language of Spanish.   During high school, my mother was active in supporting the United Farm Workers movement, where the slogan “Si Se Puede” has its origins.  When we visited her small New York State town of Lithuanian immigrants, I would hear tales of how my mother worked hard as a young girl to “save the grapes.” Growing up in the 1980s with a photojournalist father, I was surrounded by the images of political struggles in Latin America founded on the value “Si Se Puede.” Through my involvement in youth organizing, I have seen how “Si Se Puede” has been adopted by people in social movements around the world.

This experience with “Si Se Puede” only makes me more hopeful about its adaptation to the U.S. political mainstream as “Yes We Can.” But my knowledge of political struggle also makes me skeptical. While “Yes We Can” has been mainstreamed, the history of “Si Se Puede” has not.

“Yes We Can” is not an original concept, which is exactly why it is so powerful.  It links us to a rich history of political struggle and hope and, most importantly, it links us most intimately to a Latin American context.  The only way we can most benefit from this slogan’s power is if we understand the relationship between Latin America, the U.S., and democracy.  Only then will we appreciate the tremendous responsibility that comes with adopting this slogan.

“Yes We Can” can only be transformative when “we” is in a constant process of widening.  It is the U.S.’s dedication to this widening that concerns me. As I watch Obama’s inauguration in El Salvador, two days after the Salvadoran municipal elections, this concern is deeply felt.  U.S. democracy has greatly benefited from the power of “Yes We Can,” but we continue to suppress the democratic rights of Salvadorans who share this slogan with us.

Two of the most important components of democracy were greatly transformed for the better during the process of the recent U.S. elections.  These two aspects were youth inclusion and propaganda control.  It is exactly these two themes that are being suppressed within the context of the Salvadoran elections.   At the same time we celebrate as citizens of a truer democracy, the U.S. role in the lives of Salvadorans is suppressing their rights to democracy.

 

PROPAGANDA

The “You Tube” transformation of political propaganda has opened democratic participation in what I consider one of the greatest advancements of our society.  While there are issues with this transformation, I believe it is a tremendous step toward greater transparency of and participation in our democratic system.  However, despite the strides we have made in the U.S., in El Salvador the U.S. has played a principal part in a dirty propaganda campaign aimed at scaring people into voting for the right.

U.S. officials have made statements saying that if the FMLN wins, the U.S. relationship to El Salvador may be in jeopardy because of supposed connections between the leftist party and the FARC in Colombia and between the FMLN and Hugo Chavez.  Some journalists claim that if the FMLN wins, El Salvador will become a crucial part of the network and expansion of armed radical Islamic groups in the Americas. These relationships have been unsubstantiated and are unfounded.

Claims have also been made that if the FMLN wins, remittances and immigration status of Salvadorans in the U.S. will be in jeopardy.  Again, this is absolutely unsubstantiated.  Nevertheless, these lies continue to dominate the propaganda of the Salvadoran elections.  The U.S. is actively suppressing the right of Salvadorans to accurate and honest information and is greatly interfering with El Salvador’s political process.

 

YOUTH INCLUSION

Young people have always had a large role in social and political transformation in El Salvador. However, despite their significant representation in both the U.S. economy and the Salvadoran economy, Salvadoran youth continue to be marginalized by economic and political systems.

As a consequence of neoliberal policies, 700 people leave El Salvador every day for better economic opportunities.  The majority are young.  In the U.S., immigrants have no say in the political system that controls the economic system that is based on their labor.  In addition to the tremendous contribution young Salvadorans make to the U.S. economy, they are also the people who keep the Salvadoran economy from collapsing.  Their remittances are the greatest part of the Salvadoran economy, making them the foundation of the Salvadoran economy.  Despite the fact that more Salvadorans live in Los Angeles than San Salvador, no system exists for them to participate in their country’s elections.  For them to have a say, they must travel to El Salvador to vote.  This is an impossible option for most Salvadoran immigrants.

Young people in El Salvador face another extreme form of marginalization. Violence is a major theme in the insecurity of El Salvador.  Social and political activists, many of them young people, have been disappeared and murdered in death squad style.  Gang violence is a pressing  issue for Salvadorans, in particular young Salvadorans. The history of El Salvador’s civil war and the emergence of gangs such as MS-13 reveal that the organized violence that occurs in El Salvador would not be what it is without the policies of the U.S.

Instead of admitting the real reasons for the existence of gangs and the way political parties have manipulated and used them, youth delinquency has become an important scapegoat for a multitude of social problems. Young people are constantly targeted and profiled as being dangerous.  While the democratic process has become more open to many young people in the U.S., the Salvadoran political system continues to try to marginalize young people from the political system through intimidation and violence.

 

CONCLUSION

Despite the extreme system of marginalization Salvadoran youth face, it is these youth who most exemplify the essence of “Si Se Puede” and “Yes We Can.”  Salvadorans want just as much, if not more, of a change as what we are experiencing in the U.S. In the municipal elections, the FMLN did very well despite the powerful and dirty tactics of the right.  During my observation of the election, I saw youth involved at all levels of the democratic process—from putting up a blockade to prevent Hondurans from wrongfully voting in their elections to being officials on all levels of electoral boards. Young people reported on radio stations about the elections and served as human rights observers. But then, youth participation has always looked like this in El Salvador.

Those of us dedicated to improving democracy in the U.S. must realize that both El Salvador and the U.S. are at one of the most historically significant points in their histories and that these histories are becoming more and more intimately linked. If one country steps down the wrong path it brings the other with it.

I am excited and optimistic about the U.S. finally making “Si Se Puede” our democratic context, but we must understand that we are only at the early stages of understanding this political slogan’s history and power. Obama’s inauguration is the beginning of a long and difficult process that demands humility, dignity, and hard work. Luckily, what lies before us is the opportunity to become the brothers and sisters of the most experienced and dedicated people who, for as long as the existence of history, have dreamed, loved, and worked for the right to believe that yes, we all can.