240
PARTISAN REVIEW
It's not a market economy because it's not open; access to it is con–
trolled.
KA:
You have spoken very eloquently about the need for legalizing
private property, using the idea of private property in more than just
the sense of owning a piece of land , but in its larger legalistic sense.
What I'm trying to get at is the difference between a mercantilist
economy and a market economy where there are legal obligations by
government to citizens who are considered property owners.
HS:
In Peru, though most people own something or possess some–
thing, very few have legal title to their possessions. Only about 30
percent of poor people in Lima, for example, have some form of title
to their land; the other 70 percent don't. The right to secure property
for the poor has , of course , other consequences than opening the way
to economic prosperity. It allows them to defend themselves ade–
quately against various forms of oppression.
It
brings a sense of real–
ism to political movements. It makes democracy a more orderly and
coherent process . Thus, while initially it appears to be only an eco–
nomic phenomenon, it brings with it important social and political
consequences that are essential to furthering democratic institutions
and processes .
KA:
You have said that it is not enough to suggest new policies in
Latin America and other sectors of the third world , but that it is
also necessary to confront the ideas that undergird the present sys–
tems and to articulate the principles that will constitute the intellec–
tual framework for reforms . Specifically, how would you character–
ize the mental universe of the past that has created the situation that
exists in Peru today, and how would you define the sort of change
that would facilitate reforms in the future?
HS:
Well, many Latin American intellectuals have seen the poverty
in Peru and in other Latin American countries and have said, as you
suggested earlier, that their poverty was the result of exploitation
from abroad or from lack of initiative. But our observations , not our
ideas , show that the primary identifiable causes of our poverty are of
our own creation. Until you take away the obstacles that we have
described, we feel that we should not blame our poverty on anybody
else . Therefore , we think that the people who have had ideas or have
had concepts regarding what our poverty is all about have simply
not been in touch with facts . What we're hoping to demonstrate
through our studies is that they're mistaken, and that there are many
real, internal things that can be done to correct this. So , I think it's
not more ideas on our side, but more facts on our side which will ac-
