I agree with Don
Santo when he says that this new proposal must challenge the legacy of
colonization from within. He recognizes that it is really hard to escape from this
legacy “because…[to] try to compete at the same level
with the bigger software is almost impossible because it basically controls the
Software) Therefore, this new
proposal advocates for a project of self-colonization using the same methods practiced
by the colonizers.
has become very complicated to propose something without affecting others. Or
as Foucault would argue, every time we try to bring a subjugated knowledge back
to the surface, we need to ask ourselves what are we replacing? What are we
removing? Are we bringing a new knowledge back to the surface based on the global
Therefore, Don Santo and I believe that instead of looking for the most
suitable answer we should construct a response that is obviously meant to fail.
We need to find some kind of form that functions as a camouflage to help us
navigate in the field of the colonizer. We believe that this camouflage can be found
within the process of copying the copies left by the colonizers. This process of
copying will eventually create a new option based on a ‘real-fake’ answer. This
seems to be the most suitable way to respond, since Latin America was invented
using real-fake facts.