Caracterizar área

As the previous chapter has shown, the region of Neuquén was incorporated into

Argentina as a national territory in 1884 by the end of the military campaigns conducted against Mapuche societies established in the region at least since the seventeenth century. For many decades, Neuquén remained a National Territory under federal jurisdiction until it became a province in 1955. During the period between the end of the military conquest and the provincialization of Neuquén, Mapuche families came together in the form of lof (communities) and negotiated land-related issues with the federal authorities in Buenos Aires.57 These negotiations, in turn, took place in a context in which national

56

In Chubut, there are approximately 65 indigenous communities.

57

A lof is usually the term used by the Mapuche to name a community. A lof traditionally consists of a group of families living in the same area. These families have been traditionally interrelated by marriage along patrilineal lines (women often left their own communities after marriage). The conformation of lof along these lines, however, is more the exception than the rule in contemporary Patagonia.

integration and the delineation of borders were the two key goals of the authorities of the National Territory (Falaschi et al 2005, 180).58 Thus, the first half of the twentieth century witnessed attempts by Neuquén to assimilate its population, including Mapuche communities, to the Argentinean nation, granting them some support to establish

agricultural colonies of the type described in the previous chapter. Public education, with strong nationalist and religious components, supplemented this mission.

Significant changes in the relationship between indigenous societies and Neuquén took place with the emergence of a new provincial political party shortly after the province adopted its constitution in 1957. With very few exceptions, since its inception in 1962, the Movimiento Popular Neuquino (Popular Movement of Neuquén, MPN) has been the hegemonic political party in charge of the provincial government. Adopting a populist rhetoric, the MPN has since its beginnings taken a stance against the federal state to preserve its provincial autonomy. For example, it supported a provincial sense of

belonging highlighting a particular identity that, interestingly enough, included aspects of Mapuche culture. This inclusion, in turn, can be explained considering the wider context in which the provincial state (and its hegemonic political party, the MPN) and Mapuche communities have been establishing relationships with each other.

Historically, Neuquén’s successive governments have maintained a strong relationship with Mapuche rural communities. They have done so by implementing development strategies that affect the territories where Mapuche communities are located, such as foresting projects and support to handicrafts for the tourism industry, as well as the provision of food, clothing, and other basic necessities. Such relationship, however, has been built on patron-client networks and cooptation of community leaders. In this context and depending on their location, many rural communities still make a living by raising livestock, providing labour for larger estates, or by providing goods and services in the tourism industry (e.g., handicrafts, tourist guides).

58

The importance of these goals was the result of a perceived threat to national security coming from Chile.

This relationship between the state of Neuquén and Mapuche communities began in 1964 when the provincial government under the MPN assigned “reserved” lands to 18

indigenous agrupaciones (groupings). Since then, the provincial government has created different governmental agencies to deal with the social needs and “development” needs of indigenous communities.59 In practice, however, the reach of the provincial state into the internal affairs of Mapuche communities resulted in the consolidation of political patronage and cooptation of its leaders (Falaschi et al 2005). In the early 1970s, other “communities”, the term now preferred by state discourse, were recognized, totalling 37. Since registration of indigenous communities is also possible within the National Institute of Indigenous Affairs (under federal jurisdiction), some of Neuquén’s communities have been registered at the federal level when the province did not grant such recognition.60 Thus, the legal status of approximately 15 Mapuche communities in Neuquén is under dispute as they are only recognized by the INAI.61 Moreover, the official understanding of “communities” as “localised settlements recognized by the state” excludes from the definition both dispersed rural families and Mapuche peoples living in cities (Kradolfer 2011, 46).

In all cases, however, it is the legal ownership of the assigned land that is a matter of legal as well as political controversy. This is often the case as Argentina’s Civil Code, the legal instrument that regulates private property in all provinces, only recognizes

individual private property and not collective ownership over lands. As a result, there is a tension between the Constitutional reform of 1994 that recognizes collective ownership of the territories indigenous peoples “traditionally inhabit” and the Civil Code, which

59

These agencies changed their names frequently but they were often under the umbrella of the Ministry or Secretary of Social Services or Welfare. Echoing the emergence of a new Mapuche activism in the 1980s, official documents replaced the terminology of “indigenous” or “aboriginal” with “Mapuche.”

60

The INAI runs the Registro Nacional de Comunidades Indígenas (National Register of Indigenous Communities, RENACI) independently from each provincial registration system for indigenous

communities. Thus, despite the weak role of INAI for dealing with indigenous affairs in the provinces, the institute can still influence certain legal boundaries for registering indigenous communities, sometimes in open defiance to the provinces.

61

regulates the procedures on private ownership. In addition, since 2012 the Kirchner administration has been trying to address the reform of the Civil Code but it has encountered the active resistance of many indigenous organizations due to the lack of consultation and the lack of clarity on the matter of indigenous collective ownership. Most Mapuche peoples today, however, live in cities. It is difficult to assess the living conditions of Mapuche urban dwellers but some studies suggest that for the most part the only available sources of income are in the informal sector or government welfare. In the past, many young Mapuche moved to urban centres to find jobs in some of the new industries related to the energy sector, such as the steel industry, before they entered into a period of crisis in the 1990s. While these precarious labour conditions have forced many Mapuche to live in poor neighbourhoods, it is from these locations that many contemporary organizations have begun their activism. The Confederación Mapuche de Neuquén is one of those organizations that began in the city in order to become

autonomous from the state’s patronage system of control.