The first time I heard the words “reparation” and “restitution” together was back in the 1990s when the Chilean state sought a “legal”, clean, and conflict-free solution to the grave impacts of crimes against humanity committed during the civilian-military dictatorship. The methods used neither repaired, nor - even less - restored the radical damage that institutional violence had caused to society and to those directly subjected to that violence. The wound, and the lack of truth or justice, remains a social fracture. Today, these two words speak to me of the deep colonial wound in the country that remains open.
As the researcher and writer Helios F. Garcés points out, it is not possible to decolonize (e.g., the museum, the state, our territories) without first transforming the current colonial, patriarchal, capitalist system. Therefore, restitution and reparation are themselves acts of social transformation towards a just and oppression-free society. Engaged in local anti-racist and anti-colonial struggles, particularly focusing on the critical analysis of anti-Roma activities, Garcés collaborates with activists and debates decoloniality within the Spanish government and beyond. Helios is a colleague with whom we continually engage in these discussions. Below is a transcript of a brief conversation wherein he shares his views on the “reparation and restitution” debate.
Nancy Garín: From your perspective, and considering the processes and debates you have been involved in over recent years, both within the Spanish government and in other territories, what is your view on the ongoing debates regarding the idea of “reparation and restitution” for the colonial process?
Helios (Ilyas) F. Garcés: I think that, for several reasons, the current debates on “reparation and restitution” within the context of the Spanish government function, at least for now, as mere noise; although they might generate necessary horizons later. Let me explain.
First of all, and this is the fundamental point from which we should always start, it is absolutely impossible to repair or restore, even minimally, the incalculable damages derived from centuries of persecution, dispossession, exploitation, and genocide. The empire, with its colonies, enslavement, and corresponding forms of structural and institutional racism - part of the very nature of the emergence and maintenance of capital - has caused immense harm to certain communities and their territories.
Secondly, the claim that, in territories like ours, where the existence of racism has not been politically recognized, apart from isolated statements, it is possible to have a serious, consequential debate on reparation and restitution, is absurd. I am not trying to delegitimize the noble and valuable desires of many comrades who belong to the broad spectrum of anti-racism struggles in the Spanish government and who wish to have this debate. For myself, I have used the term “reparations” on many occasions. However, I must warn that if I have done so, it is to help provoke a philosophical and political shift at a time when the ideology of “integration and inclusion” (which is nothing more than a friendly version of the ideology of integration) continues to dominate the political horizon of our situation - including on the left - when addressing the problem of race.
Lastly, the debates on “reparation and restitution” within a capitalist society can be completely appropriated by neoliberal reasoning, which is also present in certain forms of anti-racism. Obviously, I am not opposed to the idea of reparation, but as countless voices of Black and Indigenous radical thinkers have warned, for example Abya Yala and the USA, I maintain that the best reparation is the construction of a society beyond capitalism, imperialism, and racism: a society in which survival does not depend on exploiting, oppressing, and dispossessing other peoples. Is this idealistic? If justifying the fundamental horizon of the anti-colonial struggles that gave rise to the fight against racism is idealistic, then yes.
Fortunately, more and more Roma (gitanos) clearly perceive this horizon and, as ancestrally-oppressed peoples within Europe, do not allow themselves to be hypnotized by the seductive siren songs sung by social democracy. Social democracy (and this is clearly seen regarding the genocide of the Palestinian, Congolese, Sudanese, and Haitian peoples) continues to depend on the genocide of other peoples, the plundering of their wealth, and the gradual destruction of the planet. However, to tame the potential rebellion and emancipation that reside in critical self-organization, and to fully integrate the Roma people into capitalist society, social democracy generates enormous sums of crumbs and symbolic speeches, whose implementation is handed over to racist governments and organizations that legitimize an unjust status quo concerning people of other colors. There is no reparation or restitution possible in the current context, not for the Roma people. The only possible reparation and restitution is the abolition of the current situation and the creation of a truly just one for the people of the earth and the earth itself.
G.: Within the field of art, and regarding recent gestures in Europe, the US, and Canada to return objects from museums and archives, it is evident that these actions are often orchestrated by central governments. In many cases, the rules are designed so that the return is never actually fulfilled. On the other hand, numerous institutions in Western countries are implementing ideas and practices to “decolonize” museums. What do you think about all this?
F. G.: Actually, the answer to this question takes us back to the first question. As you said, it is a planned staging. The concern about whether a museum can be decolonized makes us confront the initial problem. Museums exist within a specific society; therefore, there is no decolonizing a museum without decolonizing the society it is embedded in. Does this mean that the governments of the Global South, and especially the people [of these countries], cannot claim certain reparative gestures? I would never say that. The governments of the Global South, and the people who fight for their sovereignty against imperial hegemony, have every right to pressure the institutions of the Global North to return what was stolen from them, including objects from their museums.
However, the perspective I promote is much more ambitious from an ethical, economic, and political point of view. We dream of decolonizing the modes of production that dominate our economic system. We dream of decolonizing the power relations that dominate our political world, both locally and globally, including governments and their institutions. And we dream of decolonizing our colonized inner reality.
We dream, knowing this reality is not only plausible, but that it is the only possible reality if we want a truly just world. And we dream while working to make it a reality. Although the situation is not very promising, the struggles of people in the Global South and within the empire itself - such as the anti-imperialist solidarity, especially by students in the US and Europe with the Palestinian people - show that there is hope.
G.: What would the process of “decolonizing” museum institutions, in terms of possible reparation and restitution in art and cultural spaces, look like for you? And what would it mean to decolonize (if such a thing is possible) our epistemological framework of art and culture? Do you think it’s possible?
F. G.: There is a conclusion, which I consider terribly wrong, derived from the ideas in the two previous answers, with which I connect this third question. Some might think that until a profound decolonization of the power structures supporting our social model is achieved, epistemological decolonization would be impossible. I don’t believe this.
What I believe is that these two processes - material and epistemological decolonization - are intimately connected, including in the art world. Advocating for a politics of decolonization inherently implies making changes in the epistemological field. There is a desire for a just society free from oppression, dispossession, and exploitation. There is a desire to break with the imperial monologue and its oppressive logic because there is something in our communal conscience that rejects the implied omnipotence of such narratives.
From my point of view, as the most insightful proponents of decolonization have argued, decolonization must occur in the spheres of power, knowledge, and being. Whether or not this is possible in the art world, and specifically within museums, must be considered with this understanding.
\\
This text was originally published on a-desk.org
- IMAGE CREDITS
Cover: Assembly of Espectros de lo Urbano, 2020. Courtesy Nancy Garín © Espectros de lo Urbano.
