By Luis Manuel Aguana
The first thing that came to mind when I first heard this sort of “Venezuela, 51st State of the USA” was to wonder how far the physical, moral, and spiritual destruction of Venezuelans had gone, to the point that anyone born in this country would aspire to be part of another, forgetting for a moment everything that has happened in the territory we know today as Venezuela in more than 500 years of history, as well as all the blood shed since then to be considered an independent republic, on par with any other nation.
When the Spanish arrived in these lands that later became known as “American,” civilizations like the Maya and the Inca already existed, possessing mathematical, astronomical, hydraulic engineering, medical, agricultural, food, public hygiene, and urban planning knowledge that European powers only achieved centuries later.
There is evidence that the main indigenous ethnic groups of the northern region of present-day South America were not isolated and maintained an intense trade network that connected the civilizations of the north (Maya-Mesoamerica) and south (Inca-Andean Region) of present-day America.
The Caribs, our most direct indigenous ancestors, and those who waged the most resistance against the Spanish, actively participated in this trade network in the Caribbean, serving as a link for products from the Orinoco Delta to the Greater Antilles (see short research on all of the above in, https://gemini.google.com/share/d3dd86d333b3).
Why do I offer this brief overview of the pre-Columbian era? To remind ourselves that the peoples today considered "Latin American" possessed civilizations that were, in many respects, far more advanced than the European cultural phenomenon—a phenomenon that, by virtue of its superior military technology and inclination toward domination, brought its territorial disputes and wars of conquest to these lands, destroying cultures and civilizations that had been established for centuries and imposing a way of life deemed "civilized." This cost millions of lives and resulted in the imposition of one world upon another.
We could debate for years whether what arrived was superior to what already existed; however, history confirms that perhaps it was not—for centuries later, wars broke out among the descendants of those very invaders seeking independence from the original conquering powers, shedding yet more blood along the way. The sum total of this entire process is, in essence, what we are today.
The chronology of the conquest reveals a series of unequal exchanges,
marked by the subjective nature of value. The classic example of the
"little mirrors" illustrates a clash between two distinct worldviews:
each group willingly surrendered what was superfluous within its own context in
exchange for what it desired. Thus, the handing over of gold was not an act of
naivety, but rather a reflection of a profound cultural divergence; for the
indigenous peoples, the precious metal served a sacred or decorative function—a
stark contrast to the pecuniary value ascribed to it by the Europeans.
The local inhabitants did not grasp the magnitude of the danger until the strangers' greed turned violent. By prioritizing gold over human life, the invaders justified the extermination of the local population—treating them as mere beasts—driven solely by the material value they placed upon precious metals.
Regardless of the era, we now find ourselves facing the very same dilemma of an unbalanced exchange. We currently covet what we perceive as valuable—not merely due to our unprecedented situation of criminal devastation, but because we harbor the perception (erroneous, in my view) that what is being offered to us as a "superior way of life" is nothing more than a mere "trinket," updated for the modern age, exchanged for the very gold ingot upon which we are currently seated.
Had we been offered this same deal back in the 1950s or 60s—when our currency was stronger than the dollar and the American way of life was vastly superior to what it is today—we would have laughed such a "51st State" proposal right in the face of the U.S. President.
Yet now, desperation is driving us to even consider such a bad bargain. And this is not solely because our national wealth remains incalculable—despite having suffered the greatest and most criminal theft of resources ever inflicted upon any nation in human history—but also because our cultural inclination to resolve problems as quickly as possible compels us to accept this offer without a second thought.
I will not delve here—as others have already done—into the specific steps, both domestic and international, required to bring about such an aberration: the erasure of our history and culture with a single stroke of the pen in favor of such utter folly. Instead, my reflection is directed toward why this path is preferred over the alternative: working to extricate ourselves from this situation through our own means—and, of course, with whatever assistance may be offered to us (even by the U.S. itself)—by utilizing the very resources we are currently proposing to trade away for a mere "trinket."
We Caribs were warriors long before the Spaniards appeared on our shores. We were not particularly tillers of the soil, nor were we a peaceful people. For this reason, we were devastated and forced to adopt the Spanish way of life—even compelled to change our first and last names—as the Catholic religion was imposed upon us.
According to my father, Dr. Raúl Aguana Figuera—a historian—in the face of this aggression, our ancestors in the eastern part of the country refused to exchange their indigenous surnames for Castilian ones. Few families of indigenous Venezuelan origin remain that still preserve their original surnames to this day, as demonstrated in a list published over 40 years ago by the Centro Virtual Cervantes: “…a list of indigenous surnames that, surprisingly, has proven to be quite extensive, considering the massive destruction of indigenous peoples—due to wars and epidemics—that took place during the Conquest and the Colonial era” (see *Notas sobre apellidos venezolanos: Apellidos indígenas*, p. 149, *Thesaurus*, Vol. XL, No. 1 (1985), by Jaime Tello, in https://cvc.cervantes.es/lengua/thesaurus/pdf/40/TH_40_001_130_0.pdf).
It is possible that these lines are driven by the Venezuelanist passion of an indigenous descendant native to these long-suffering lands; and while I cannot deny that Trump’s “little mirror” may look appealing, neither can we deny the historically proven fact that such exchanges have invariably turned out to be a bad deal for our peoples.
The cost of having secured our freedom from the Spanish—thereby establishing ourselves as an independent Republic—is fully comparable to the cost the North Americans themselves paid to secure their own freedom from the British.
Are we truly willing to trade our hard-won status as an independent Republic—forged in over 500 years of struggle and bloodshed—for the “little mirror” of a “fading American Dream”? It is truly astounding that we would be ready to hand over our national wealth—considered among the most vast and valuable in the world—in exchange for a promise that the other party no longer possesses, and which they themselves are struggling—unsuccessfully—to reclaim. One need not be a descendant of the Caribs to recognize that we are witnessing history repeat itself: a profoundly unequal exchange and a terrible deal for our nation.
Caracas, May 14, 2026
Blog: TIC’s & Derechos Humanos, https://ticsddhh.blogspot.com/
Email: luismanuel.aguana@gmail.com
Twitter:@laguana
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario