STATE OF SABOTAGE: In June of 1992, artist Robert Jelinek founded the “Sabotage” group in Kassel, Germany. “Sabotage” began operating that year as a small project/collective, and in 1994 they became into “Sabotage Communications — an art organisation and music label”. Eventually, “Sabotage” evolved into “a union of various sublabels brought together by their shared way of thinking and similar style of expression through different media.” These “sublabels” are simply “a number of flexible subdivisions which emerge as the needs arise and dissolve under their own inertia. Each of the sublabels primarily works within its medium, nevertheless their bonds are firm and fruitful. The fields of activities of Sabotage defy definition of contents, theme and geographic concentration and therefor different projects and target groups are represented in different sublabels”. These sub-groups fall under the category of art — Sabotage acts (since 1992), Alibi Service (1992-95), Sabotage events (Since 1994), Sabotage projects (since 1995) or CaSH (1998) — and music — Sabotage Recordings (1994-99), Craft Records (since 1995), Subetage Records (since 1999). “Since 1992 more than 100 international ‘public sabotages’ have taken place in form of performances, actions, events and exhibitions…‘Sabotage’ in this sense means the braking of conventions, the artistic interruption of processes of thinking and manipulational transfer. ‘Sabotage’ is not a technic that transports meaning. Sabotage transgresses positions without presenting a new social order, provokes thinking by intervening in the official discourse. Sabotage is the experiment to brake up incrustation of an organised bourgeois society that insulates itself against all changes and tries to make thinkable new possibilities.” Etymologically, the name “Sabotage” originates “from the French word ‘sabot’ and means ‘to trample with wooden shoes.’ A sabot is a clog with a leather top. At the beginning of agricultural mechanization French farm workers threw their ‘sabotes’ into harvesting and processing machines (which were taking their jobs), thereby blocking the complicated mechanics of the mowing and threshing machines and rendering them useless. For the sake of their labor, they engaged in ‘sabotage.’”
SALT SPRING ISLAND: Named by officers of the Hudson's Bay Company for the cold and briny saltwater springs on the north end of the island, Salt Spring Island is the largest, most populated, and most visited of British Columbia’s Southern Gulf Islands. It is located in the Strait of Georgia, nestled up against the east coast of Vancouver Island. Saltspring Island (as it is also known) has “a year round population of 10,000, an annual tourist flow of over 200,000”. Its longtime residents, unfortunately, are faced with an ongoing problem: namely, the “Americanization” of Salt Spring Island, which is driving up land prices. This American migration is part of a larger trend of gentrification on the Gulf Islands that dates back to the 1960s and 70s, when young people moved there searching for a simpler way of life. Over the years, housing prices on Salt Spring have increased dramatically, because comfortable middle-aged city-dwellers are buying up country property and investing in real estate (preferably on the waterfront) where they can develop estates for weekends and holiday retreats. According to one Salt Spring realtor, 1/3 of all waterfront property on Salt Spring — the jewel/star of the Southern Gulf Islands — is already owned by Americans, and there are other areas of the island that are 50% American-owned. In order to address these concerns, a few citizens have gathered together to form the Sustainable Salt Spring Island Coalition, whose goal is to develop an independent political entity — an island-state — in order to ensure a sustainable community. One of the leaders of the SSSIC, Eric Booth (who was born and raised on Salt Spring), voiced his alarm to a reporter named Grant Shilling: “What is the current immigration criteria for coming to Salt Spring now? If you have the money you can come. What definition of citizenship is that? If Salt Spring were to become an Island Nation like the Isle of Mann or the Channel Islands we could define what criteria make for a citizen. In the future the people who contribute to the uniqueness of Salt Spring, the artists and craftspersons, the musicians and farmers, won’t be able to afford to live here. Then the Island will be only for the rich. We can insure that there will always be room for a culturally diverse population if we define it by our citizenship.” Perhaps one solution would be for Salt Spring to emulate something that is already being done on Prince Edward Island, where property owners who were born outside its boundaries pay double the property tax of the indigenous population.
SAN BLAS ISLANDS: In the Caribbean Sea, just a few miles off the eastern half of Panama’s northern shores, lays the pristine San Blas Archipelago, which encompasses more than 360 exquisite offshore atolls protected by a large barrier reef. This series of small, low-lying tropical islands includes about 36 that are inhabited/owned by Panama’s most widely known indigenous group, the Kuna (also spelled Cuna). These tranquil tropical islands are part of an autonomous territorial reserve known since 1998 as the Comarca Kuna Yala (Kuna Land, Kuna Mountain), where an additional 13 Kuna communities are located in a swathe of lush rainforest along the coast. This relatively narrow mainland portion of the Comarca (an administrative subdivision, but technically not a province) stretches some 375 kilometers in length, bordering Colombia in the east and the Provincia de Colón in the west. Overall, the Kuna Yala bioregion comprises an area of about 3,206 km². Its political capital is the port city of El Porvenir, located on the westernmost island. San Blas, it seems, is also the name which had formerly been imposed upon the Kuna’s entire terrain. Though officially a part of Panama, the Comarca is currently administered as a “country within a country”, and the full expanse is under the absolute rule of the Kuna people, who gained sole control of it after the chain of events pertaining to the 1925 Kuna Revolution — a revolt against the assimilationist policies being implemented by the Panamanian government at the time that included the introduction of a Panamanian police force, mandatory schooling and dress codes. The causes of this important incident can be traced to the beginning of the 20th century, after the United States had backed Panama's secession from Colombia. The Kuna were unwilling to accept the supremacy of their new overlords, just as they had been unwilling to accept the authority of Colombia or Spain. Plus, Panama had chosen not to exercise administrative control over the islands until 1915, when a departmental government was established in San Blas. At that time, the forces of this colonial police were stationed on several islands. Their presence, along with a number of other circumstances, led to the revolt. The construction of the Panama Canal was also a contributing factor. Outside activity suddenly skyrocketed, and many Kuna men, now working in enterprises outside of traditional village life were heavily influenced by outside values. Diverse social tensions were caused by this shift, and the unique indigenous customs of the Kuna were further endangered by the unemployed workers who returned to San Blas after the canal had been formally inaugurated. In the 1930s, Kuna laborers found jobs in the American Canal Zone (which was turned over to Panamanian rule in 1999) for short periods of time, usually a year or less, before returning to Kuna Yala. By the 1970s, an increasing number of Kunas began permanently living in or around Panama City, and as the amount of people migrating to the capital increased, urban Kuna barrios were formed in some areas.
For this organization, “Unpredictability and subversion” (characterized by solidarity and unity) became “escape routes through the system of dominance.” In their quest towards greater individual self-determination and collective autonomy, these close-knit saboteurs clip-clopped their way into the micro-national world. Enter “Amorph!” (the most important and influential performance festival of Europe), which took place in Helsinki from August 29-31 of 2003. That year's theme was “Micronations”. Fitting to the theme, the festival was relocated to the uninhabited island of Harakka, just 100 meters off of Helsinki. During this international summit of mini-states, conferences, presentations, proclamations and performances were presented by representatives of the individual micronations. “On August 30, 2003 at 1:00 pm Finnish time…SoS (the State of Sabotage) was called into existence before a large audience. ROBERT JELINEK and H.R. GIGER, together with ‘HUUTAJAT,’ the Finnish 25-man screaming men’s choir, ceremonially inaugurated the state.” According to their “official website and electronic embassy” (http://www.sabotage.at/sos/), the State of Sabotage “is a secular, sovereign and democratic state.” Their “State Constitution was publicly recited and resolved on September 4, 2005 and has been valid and legally binding since that time…The assets of the SoS state are the creation, protection, mediation, and positioning of art and culture. SoS is the first sovereign cultural state according to international law. SoS fulfills all criteria required of a sovereign state (territory, population, and state organization), as well as education and training in terms of artistic freedom.” The long list of ideals promoted by the State of Sabotage include: “Education, vision and utopia” and “Internal locations and dislocations, displacements and dissolutions of the self-compositions that form a living society” and “the conservation, protection and creation of the freedom of art and culture.”
The artistic process is at the heart of the State of Sabotage: “State diplomacy is conducted through artistic sovereignty and trans-nationality — art as state as a direct form of independent state art…The German concept of Staatskunst (art of state) alludes to the fact that in governments of previous centuries the balancing and equalization of manifold factors and powers was in fact understood as an art. The antiquated concept of Staatskunst also has another meaning: It reminds us that in former times the promotion of art and culture was seen as a state goal and rulers recognized that art and culture were essential components of their wealth and capital. The SoS state is bound to this understanding of ‘state art’ and strives for the development and promotion of its own SoS Art Foundation. In cooperation with various artists, artistic practices, models, visions and utopias, as well as trans-national characteristics, will become visible and new conditions of the reality of state and art will be exemplified.”
Though headquartered in Vienna, the State of Sabotage “is not a geographic place, but rather a concept. SoS is also primarily an idea and only secondarily a concrete territory. SoS has no pre-defined territory, but one that is characterized by constant, and theoretically unlimited, growth. SoS has no indigenous population, but is open to all those who wish to join of their own free will. The territory of the State of Sabotage grows with each new citizen.” The State of Sabotage “may emerge anywhere geographically” and these regions/provinces “are clearly demarked as State territory.” Thus, “the State of Sabotage is not a purely virtual community, it encompasses real state territory. In September 2003, SoS first hoisted its flag over its own territory on the fifth continent.”: Baldrockistan, situated in Australia (between Tenterfield and Stanthrope, 3km from Bald Rock National Park on the New South Wales-Queensland border). “Even if the SoS state only secondarily represents a concrete territory, the development of its own territory in Baldrockistan is of recreational and spiritual significance. The grounds already offer accommodations, an excellent road network and electricity. In the next few years, artist studios and artistic projects should emerge in harmony with flora and fauna, without the intention of settling. Baldrockistan is a neutral zone. Just like natives and visitors, the SoS state is itself a guest in Baldrockistan/Australia. The grounds are utilized and protected in accord with nature, aborigines and natives.” The SoS Art Foundation plans “award travel and residency scholarships to/in Baldrockistan/Australia to young artists…And artistic productions, conferences, events and workshops are also planned on the SoS grounds in Baldrockistan/Australia.” Other SoS territories include Circle Rock and Pendulum House in Austria, and Trinity in the Czech Republic. In addition, the State of Sabotage claims a Shadow Empire (The Dark Night of the Planetary Soul), which they describe as “a virtual continent, a rhizome-like plateau for the SoS citizens. In contrast to the real SoS territory in Baldrockistan, a trans-national map without beginning and end grows here in the sense of a ‘state of mind,’ determined entirely by the citizens themselves. The sizes of the individual areas in the SoS Plateau mirror the rented or owned space of the citizens, such as apartments or property.”
Part of their philosophy has to do with the concept of “Despatialization”: “A landless people cannot succumb to the same fallacy that has imposed itself on almost every settled people throughout history: to understand the land itself as the container of the people and their own land as the a-priori of their life meaning or identity. This ‘territorial phantom’ is still one of the most effective and problematic historical heirlooms because it is tied to the basic reflex of all seemingly legitimate uses of violence, national defense. It is based on the obsessive equation of place and self — the axiomatic error in territorial reasoning. Yet it is increasingly becoming exposed as an overpowering wave of transnational mobility ensures that many peoples and territories relativize their liaisons. SoS citizens are nomadizing or de-territorializing groups who constitute themselves not only through their immunity to supporting soil. Rather, their communicative interactions function as an autogenous vessel in which participants contain themselves and stay in form while the group drifts through external landscapes. As a portative state community SoS offers real transit spaces, places at which people convene, yet without wishing or being able to bind their identity to a locality. SoS spaces and places do not depend on a regular inhabitance or on a collective self. It is peculiar to SoS that it does not retain its visitors. An invulnerable license to change land and self remains untouched by global tendencies.”
The adherents of SoS define the “state” as a static entity (both terms derive from the Latin word status). “In our contemporary understanding the state is a kind of steely skeleton or matrix — constructed so that it can provide structure, grounding, and duration to a constantly changing society. Political scientists and state theorists, however, maintain that the state reached the apex of its development in the seventies and has since been in decline. Yet even at a time when the state is being pushed out of more and more areas of life and continues to lose esteem, it remains the highest existing authority — precisely because the state is more static than other forces affecting our lives. On the other hand, the state is inferior to these highly dynamic forces and lags helplessly behind the newest developments in science and technology.” The citizens of SoS are willing “not only to unfurl the banners of cultural independence, but to signal real political statehood, to attain it and to share it with others. Statehood in the sense of legal framework and instruments is the prerequisite for individually reclaiming retracted social-political rights, free spaces and cultural structures. SoS does not presently wish to join ideological blocs or systemic structures through international agreements or contracts. Politically, SoS neither can, nor wishes to be a great power. It is precisely the advantage of a microstate, with its minimal administrative organization and competent trusted partners, that it creates a high degree of flexibility. SoS has the quality of a cultural state. It knows neither officials nor functionaries — it knows only self-determined artists and active associates.”
The status of the State of Sabotage “is not determinable, but SoS is rich in non-tangible resources, thus rendering it in contradiction to the society and their demands. Life, from the standpoint of technology or economics, is never completely controllable. And therefore it is always a disruptive factor, a potential act of sabotage. It’s not about rehabilitation or securing a seat at the concert of human rights, it’s about destabilization. SoS is a phantom-like, viral, spectral presence in the synapses of our brains, with a finger on the ignition switch of our own rockets. In logical, creative consequence of its artistic process, SoS has designed an instrument for the culmination of human potential — the state as the ultimate negation of the civilized Occident…SoS is a design for life, a parallel alternative to existing forms, developments and impending conflicts…Only existence according to international law and artistic freedom are relevant. The endeavors of SoS are based on this consciousness. SoS recognizes and respects the limits of its own capabilities. As a territory, SoS continues to grow and can emerge anywhere on the globe. As a political entity, SoS can achieve more than its size suggests. It is up to the active citizens, friends and partners to strike out and pursue the right path with the necessary interest, instinct, and joy.” In 2003, the State of Sabotage drew its own artistic conclusions and declared “itself a state — a state in time, with its citizens' territories constantly growing, but without the demarcation of national borders. Everyone can own an SoS passport and enjoy the status of an SoS citizen. SoS is a physically vital collective body, installed in real daily social and political space. It is a growing organism whose dynamics, spirit and diversity are shaped by the citizens themselves.”
The State of Sabotage has issued an undated Five SoS piece. I purchased the aluminum and brass versions (copper and silver also exist) directly from their Viennese State Department & Embassy. I learned about this coin from Mr. Stephen Barnwell, who participated in the Paris leg of the micronational “We Could Have Invited Everyone” exhibit (first held in 2004 at the Reg Vardy Gallery at the University of Sunderland, and in 2005 the Andrew Kreps Gallery, in New York City). The show, now called “ÉTATS (faites-le vous-même)” was mounted in the Palais de Tokyo Contemporary Art Museum (February 1 to May 6 of 2007): “I flew out here for the ‘vernissage’.” There were many micro-states represented at the show, including his own, Nadiria (a.k.a. the Lost Colony of Antarctica) and its Dream-Dollars. “The State of Sabotage was represented by a couple of people who brought with them a coin press. People at the exhibit paid 5 Euro to pick up a sledgehammer and take a whack at the press, making their own impression. I took a good swipe at it and made a decent impression.” The hand-struck piece described by Mr. Barnwell is the same Five SoS coin that is available from the SoS Shop: at the “STATES (do it yourself)” exhibition visitors had an “opportunity to purchase ‘blank’ coins and to mint these themselves. The BIZEPS money machine makes it possible to precisely mint the 5 SoS coin with a single hammer blow.”
Images of the Sabotage coin can be viewed at the site of Mr. Chaim Dov Shiboleth's private collection (http://www.taedivm.org/coin-sabotage.html) and at the site of Mr. Haseeb Naz’s private collection (http://chiefacoins.com/Database/Micro-Nations/Sabotage.htm).
The SSSIC soon became proponents of the idea of complementary currencies like the type used by a growing number of self-sufficient communities all around the world. “The concept of Salt Spring Island Dollars was the result of roundtable discussions of the Sustainable Salt Spring Island Coalition.” In the fall of 2000, this group — which has sponsored the project since its inception — was examining how the economies of various island-nations functioned. “One of the common factors of these islands was that they each had their own local currency. Two questions arose — would it be possible to establish a local currency for Salt Spring, and if so, how could it benefit the community?” Further research led them to study “a wide range of ‘alternative’ currencies (e.g. Toronto Dollars, LETS and Hours systems).” But these monetary systems were fraught with several inherent problems: “It appeared that none of the alternative currencies had achieved ‘near universal acceptance.’ The primary limiting factor identified was that none of the local currencies were 100% redeemable into their national currency, and, as a result, the majority of merchants were hesitant or unwilling to accept a currency unless it could ‘pay the bills.’ Next was the question of how a currency goes into circulation and receives and/or maintains any value to the holder. It also appeared that, in most cases, operation of local currencies were segregated from local financial institutions.” Part of their solution, after several more brainstorming sessions, was “to have the currency go into circulation through a one-to-one exchange with the Canadian dollar. This meant it could be backed 100% by the Canadian dollar. To our knowledge this had never been done by any local currency, anywhere in the world.” Furthermore, in order to help make the paper notes more collectible, limited editions of colorful Salt Spring Island art would be featured on the back of each bill. “It was then decided to form a not-for-profit society, the Salt Spring Island Monetary Foundation, to facilitate the process of returning the proceeds of the venture back to the community…Thus, on July 17th, 2001, the SS IMF was registered with the Province of British Columbia.” Its mission statement is “to design, issue and maintain a local currency for Salt Spring Island with the goal of raising funds for worthwhile community projects while promoting local commerce and goodwill.” Finally, “The Salt Spring Island Dollars were introduced to the Island on September 15th, 2001, at Salt Spring’s largest annual gathering, the Farmer’s Institute’s Fall Fair.” In a legal sense, “Salt Spring Island Dollars are considered ‘gift certificates,’ as they meet all four of Revenue Canada's requirements.” Since the formation of the Salt Springs IMF, some of the Island’s major institutions (Island Savings Credit Union, CIBC, Bank of Montreal, Canada Post, SSI Chamber of Commerce, etc.) have lent their support to this community initiative. Currently, over 90% of all local businesses accept the local currency (200 businesses do, while only about 6 do not) on the same basis as the national currency. Every Salt Spring Dollar in circulation (purchased through various commercial outlets such as the Chamber of Commerce, the Visitor Information Centre, banks, stores, etc…) is a Canadian dollar earning deposit interest or revenue that will be spent on agreed-upon endeavors. Part of the IMF’s mandate is to distribute proceeds from the project to support local charities. Those earnings will come from unredeemed bills (due to the popularity of the high-quality currency — of which a large number of specimens will be saved by collectors or taken away as souvenirs by visitors). Although the currency is now backed mainly by Canadian dollars, it has always been intention of the IMF to move towards becoming an asset-based currency and to back it with solid community investments (“to offer loans, at no interest, to worthwhile community projects, co-invest with those groups, or invest on our own”) that would have long-term benefits for the Island as a whole.
The official Web-site of the Salt Spring Island Dollars (http://www.saltspringdollars.com/welcome.htm) also reprints a couple of interesting newspaper articles about the currency. One of them (August 15, 2001), by Tony Richards, is from Gulf Islands Driftwood: Even though the Salt Spring Island Dollars project is the brainchild of supporters of a sovereign Salt Spring movement, the SSSIC, its implementation is being undertaken by a separate organization, the SSIMF. And while most of the directors of this foundation are also part of the SSSIC, Eric Booth (one of the main coordinators of this economic undertaking), stressed in an interview that the project remains apart from efforts to create a new nation: “We want this to be apolitical, to stand on its own and be something people can take on its own merits.” Another article (circa 2001) is from The Barnacle. The author, Cameron Smith, writes that according to Mr. Booth, the primary reasons for developing an alternative money supply are to promote on-Island spending (the “shop-local aspect”) and to provide a revenue source for community projects. “Acknowledging that some Islanders may be reluctant to use Salt Spring dollars because of the project's association with the SSSIC, which is promoting Island autonomy or sovereignty, Booth said those people should look at the positive aspects of an Island currency. ‘They should consider the purpose of this,’ he said. ‘We're doing this to promote Salt Spring Island and to put money back into the community. But I suppose if they don't want to participate in that, that's their prerogative.’”
In the spring of 2006, the SS IMF began planning their very first coin. “Recognizing the long standing history of currencies backed by precious metals, we felt this was a natural progression for a local currency.” As a result, they’ve issued the sublimely sumptuous 2007 $$50 piece (intended for actual circulation, just like the island’s scrip). It was designed by internationally acclaimed gemstone carver Thomas R. McPhee, and produced at the Lasqueti Mint (see my separate listing for this particular coin-issuing entity): this numismatic establishment, located on Lasqueti Island, “set out in 1997 to engage the individual Gulf Islands in a project to create a monetary system based on precious metals that would encourage trade between the islands and put something into the hands of islanders that would have intrinsic value, be easily transported and be useable in trade. The addition of Salt Spring to the islands issuing coins is a very positive step in the creation of the new economy.” I purchased the medallion directly from Mr. Tolling Jennings, co-founder of the Lasqueti Mint. “Technically, these coins are ‘Gift Certificates’ made of .999 fine silver and shaped like a coin…This is also the most technically challenging coin the Lasqueti Mint has ever put out.” According to Mr. Bob McGinn, President of the SS IMF, “We issued a precious metal unit because we like the idea of money with inherent value. The .999 fine silver $$50 Coin represents our continuing commitment to the return to real money, and as well is another way of backing the circulating paper money besides the gold we keep in reserve.” He also stated that “The price of silver and gold being so high it is likely that their use in our coinage will never translate to them being in circulation on any kind of large scale but they remind everyone that Salt Spring Dollars are backed by more than (trust?).” Due to the success of this bullion product, other denominations of silver and gold coins are on the drawing board for the coming years.
The situation in San Blas was further complicated by the factionalism that cropped up shortly after Panama gained its freedom from Colombia. In spite of this overwhelming discontent among the Kuna, one positive and far-reaching development took place circa 1872: in Yandup (the region’s cultural, commercial, and political center), an absogued/absoguedi (shaman) named Inakailibaler (also known as Saila Abisua) convened a great Onmaked (Congress) of all the Kuna communities. Thus, the exalted sage/spiritual guide initiated the formation of an administrative and political institution known as the “Kuna General Congress” (CGK). He furthermore helped to create the office of the Sailagan Dummagan (General Caciques). He was followed by another Kuna leader, Inanakinya, who also channeled his efforts towards strengthening and consolidating this nascent Kuna Confederacy, as it were. The CGK, by 1882, had succeeded in uniting most of the Kuna villages. This body, which consists of representatives from all of the communities in Kuna Yala, remains until today the highest decision-making authority of the Kuna people. Unfortunately, after the death of Inanakinya, the General Congress split into 2 separate camps because of internal divisions. One of them was headed by Inapakinya (nephew of the late Inanakiña), the other was commanded by Simral Colman (more about him later). This tug-of-war would last various decades.
During Panama’s problematical post-independence period, the first Christian missionaries began arriving in San Blas, with the specific purpose of pacifying and acculturating the Kuna. Due to influences from the United States, the Catholic presence was immediately followed by a series of Baptist, evangelical, and Mormon churches. This double-edged process opened doors for a whole new generation of restless and intelligent young Kunas, allowing them the opportunity to get an inside glimpse of how colonialism really functioned. It also awakened them to the subtle mechanisms that were threatening to irreversibly change them as individuals, and slowly turning them against their own culture. To the outsiders, the denizens of San Blas were brute Indians and backward savages. Once the Kuna began to realize that each one of them was instrumental in this cruel transformation, the airs of insurrection began to circulate. They swept through the islands, largely due to the efforts of a slew of legendary leaders who soon began to emerge. These include Nele Kantule (Iguaibiliginia, Iguaibilikinya, or Iguibilikinya, depending on the source) of Ustupu, Simral Colman (Ologindibipilele, Ologindibipelele, Olokindibipilele, or Olokintipipilele, depending on the source; there are even variations with one additional/fewer syllable, such as Olokindibilipilele and Olokindipilele) of Aligandi, and Olonibiginya of Cartí. In 1908/09, Colman had been elected as the first Saila Dummat, or General Cacique, of the whole Kuna territory.
Meanwhile, one of the archipelago’s islands, Narganá, had elected Carlos Inaediginya Robinson (also known as Charles, Charlie, Charly) as its chief in 1903. He had recently returned from many years on a West Indian ship, and began a “civilizing” program; he would later be credited as “the father” of the campaign to educate Kuna children (by 1915, the Kuna were forced to adopt the institutional occidental educational system). His cause was taken up in subsequent years by a number of youths who had been schooled in the cities on the mainland and who gained active support from the police. These “Young Turks” sought to alter the appearance of Kuna women, who were accustomed to wearing intricately colorful “mola” blouses as part of their customary attire. Apart from imposing the substitution of molas for dresses, the oppressors also advocated the forcible removal of golden nose rings (asuolos) and elaborate earrings, forearm/ankle bracelets and beaded bands, headscarves, and the establishment of dance halls like those in the cities. The authorities, in an attempt to eliminate the language and religious rituals (puberty rites, healing ceremonies, etc…) of the Kuna, became complicit in the violent suppression of native cultural practices and began abusing the populations of several villages. Circa 1920, as colonial pressure tightened, Simral Colman was held prisoner and persecuted on various occasions. As an act of retaliation, three islands — Urgandi, Monrmankedyb and Guebdi — took up arms, resulting in several dead and wounded on both sides. The first winds of independence continued to blow all along Kuna Yala.
In 1924, a sympathetic U.S. citizen named Richard O. Marsh (the son of an Illinois congressman who went to Panama to explore sites for rubber plantations) had arrived on the islands, offering not only support to the Kuna resistance movement, but military aid from the American government. Though his reasons are uncertain, his assistance strengthens the Kuna activists and gives them the power to adopt more radical measures against their enemies. That same year, a momentous General Congress of the Kuna took place in Ailigandi Island, where Nele Kantule, Simral Colman, and Olonibiginya presented their people with a new national flag (based on a “Kaa Nugurya”/swastika design, an ancient Kuna cosmological symbol) to symbolize the identity of the Kuna Yala. It was adopted the following year.
By February of 1925, renewed aggressions from the colonial government drove the Kuna — victims of mistreatment, arbitrary punishments and torture by the waga (non-indigenous) police — to sign their “declaration of independence”, which had been supposedly composed by Simral Colman with the help of Marsh. This decision to secede was followed by the urge to rid their tribal lands of all colonial police forces and foreign overseers. Hatred towards the agents of modernization was intense throughout the area. The situation culminated on the night of the 22nd (some sources say it was the 25th), when a revolutionary army of young warriors called the “Urrigan”, purified by the healing prayers and power plants from Napguana (Mother Earth) and guided by some of their most recognized Neles (shamans), simultaneously attacked the officers stationed on the colonial bases of Ukupseni and Dupbir islands (some sources say it was Tupile). The organized rebellion, which allegedly took place after numerous meetings with the Panamanian government and even a delegation from the United States (the meddlesome Marsh?), was led by two previously mentioned, highly respected caciques: Nele Kantule and Simral Colman. In the words of Nele Kantule, “Bab Dummad” — the Great Father — “gave us culture. So that my culture is not lost and so that we recognize ourselves as the Olodulegan,” — men of gold — “our sisters must continue to wear their molas, their gold nose rings, their earrings and gold breastplates…If we start to lose our culture, we will be going down another road, right away things won't be as they were, and everyone will think in terms of money.” Three days of fierce and bloody fighting ended in the deaths of more than 20 policemen. The Kuna even garnered maritime support from the timely appearance of a United States cruiser. In the ensuing months, the struggle continued, albeit in a more veiled form. All of the mestizos are either killed or expelled from the Kuna islands. On March 5th, with American diplomatic and naval officials serving as intermediaries in negotiations with the Panamanian state, the armed conflict concludes with a peace treaty; but in the war’s aftermath, a protracted economic and political quarantine begins.
In 1930, the self-governing and semi-autonomous status of the Kuna was officially recognized by the national government in response to political pressure by its principal chieftains and perhaps by some additional intervention by the United States. In 1938, the Autonomous Territory of Kuna Yala was officially established, under the name of Comarca de San Blas. In 1945, on the island of Tubuala, the Kuna General Congress, which had divided into 2 different groups more than a generation before, was once again unified into one single entity under the guidance of three charismatic leaders: Yabilikinya, Ololebilikinya and Iguawidul Estanislao López. They achieve the unification of all Kuna islands by drafting a document called the Carta Orgánica (the Kuna Constitution). One source states that it was signed on Tuberala island. In 1953, the Kuna’s Congressional Charter is legislated by the Panamanian government; it delineates the internal governing principles and administrative structure of Kuna Yala. In 1957, the Comarca was designated an Indigenous Reserve, known today as Kuna Yala. From that moment on, the Kuna bioregion is democratically governed by three Sailagan Dummagan, elected directly by the Kuna people from among the Sailagan of the 49 communities. In 1972, the “General Congress of the Kuna Culture” (CGCK) was convened, thanks to the initiative of a group of radical students from the “Kuna Youth Movement” (MJK). Their first meeting took place on the island of Gardi Sugdup. Their main mission was: to develop and strengthen the Kuna religion; to rescue, defend and develop the cultural Kuna patrimonies and resources, and to investigate and increase the cultural, political, economical and spiritual values of the Kuna Nation. The General Congress of the Kuna Culture differs markedly from the Kuna General Congress. The CGK, by crafting the legislation that will insure Kuna autonomy, has the responsibility of representing the Kuna peoples in the context of nation-state politics. It also administers a host of social, educational and environmental projects. They meet twice yearly. The CGCK, on the other hand, is charged with safeguarding the traditional and spiritual life of the Kuna. They meet three times yearly. Both of these authorities aim at working side by side for the collective wellbeing of their communities. Under the Panamanian constitution of 1972, new political boundaries were established in Kuna Yala, and the Comarca was divided into four corregimientos (districts): Narganá, Ailigandí, Tubualá y Puerto Obaldía. By the late 1970s, the Kuna had firmly established their reputation as an organized political entity dedicated to preserving a conventional way of life and to accepting outside influences only on their own terms. Today, the Kuna have 2 representatives in the Panamanian legislature (Asamblea Nacional) and can also vote in general elections.
It should be noted that the Kuna also refer to themselves as Dule (also spelled Tule), meaning “The People”, and it is primarily because they speak a dialect called Kuna that they are commonly referred to as Kuna by outsiders. The Dule Nation is also known as the Dulenega (Homeland of the Dule) region. The autonomous territory of Tule Nega actually dates back to 1870/71, when the colony of Nueva Granada (now Colombia) ceded it via decree to the Kuna, who had been long-time residents of the Darién Jungle (where they’d faced various indigenous groups and invaders such as the English, the Scottish, the French, and pirates; they fought with some of them and allied themselves with others against the Spanish).
The aforementioned mola blouse, which seemingly defines the political sovereignty of the Kuna and their valiant resistance to Westernization, has come to symbolize their ethnic pride and their refusal to alter their time-honored way of life. Since the revolt, in which the majority of Kuna women confronted the colonial police by defiantly displaying their full costume, wearing molas has been seen as an important symbol of the Kuna people's inalienable right to self-determination. Furthermore, it is the contention of some scholars that the indigenous insurgency which spearheaded the proclamation of the Kuna’s ancestral fatherland was the first (and only?) successful native uprising to have taken place anywhere in Abya Yala (“Continent of Life” or “land in its full maturity” — the original name used by the Kuna to refer to the Americas). The Comarca has served as a model for other autochthonous territories in Panama and elsewhere. The Kuna Revolution is not just an important historical occurrence; it carries great social and cultural significance and has become a day of remembrance and celebration for Kunas living in both Kuna Yala and urban barrios. Every February, the Kuna celebrate the winning of their political independence with the local holiday of Mor Ginnid.
It is said that the Kuna of the San Blas bioregion now rank among the wealthiest and best organized indigenous peoples in the western hemisphere. Revenues from the sale of molas, tourism, and savings from migrant Kunas working in the Canal Zone provide the Kuna with steady and sizable sources of income. Every tourist who arrives in San Blas is expected to pay a small visitor's fee, usually around five dollars. It is often reported that the Kuna do not like to be photographed, and they expect to be compensated each time that they allow you to snap a picture. Though fishing is one of the main industries of San Blas, the economy of the Archipiélago is based almost entirely on coconuts. The coconuts of San Blas are said to be the best and biggest of the Caribbean, and the Kuna purportedly harvest about thirty million of them annually, half of which are exported to neighboring Colombia in exchange for clothing, rice, and other necessities. Coconuts are practically interchangeable as currency, and they are still used as a form of currency (medium of exchange) throughout San Blas. In Kuna commerce, each coconut now carries a value of about 10 U.S. cents.
Many years ago, coins were struck for this halcyon location. From Mr. David S. Plowman (whose Web-site is http://www.coins-of-panama.com/), I received a copy of Coconut Money, an article which originally appeared in the October 1978 issue of The Numismatist. Its author, William P. White, provides a nice account of its very first pieces, which were “used as trade tokens in the Mandingo Bay area of the San Blas Islands, home of the Cuna Indians. Their history is not only interesting, but probably unique in the history of coins, since as a medium of exchange they resulted in almost immediate failure.” First, he supplies the reader with the necessary historical backdrop regarding the archipelago (the islands off the coast of Panama served an important purpose during World War II; they “were used as spotting locations of shipping in defense of the Panama Canal, an early warning system of any attack.”) and the Kuna’s acclaimed coconuts, “which are grown on most of the uninhabited islands, and on the mainland…Different families ‘own’ the coconut crop of various islands and periodically travel to them to harvest the fruit”; the islands off the coast of Panama served an important purpose during World War II; they “were used as spotting locations of shipping in defense of the Panama Canal, an early warning system of any attack.” The author then introduces us to a man named John Mann, who was “the developer of ‘coconut money’”. He “first came to the islands as an artillery observer, and during that period, learned of the Cunas, their culture, their life, and their language.” He returned to the area sometime in the late 1950s, and “worked for the Panama Canal Company until the late 1960’s, when he retired in favor of a more leisurely life, and moved to the San Blas islands”. The impresario then “set up a small tourist business, taking people to the tribal lands where they could see various islands, the people, the huts, the beautiful coral reefs,” and the now famous molas. “Mann found himself trading in coconuts for labor and handiwork, and as time and coconuts accumulated, it became obvious that a ‘pocketful of coconuts’ was altogether impractical, and a warehouse full of them perishable. The obvious answer was some other medium of exchange, and, as with all other practical currencies, something small enough to carry, not quickly perishable, and representing a specific value.” He decided against using Balboas, the Panamanian coinage. For this project, he opted to take his numismatic cue directly from the “Indians’ wealth mentality — the coconut.” In order to better exploit the Kuna mindset (in the most respectful sense of the word), Mann then “enlisted the artistic abilities of Mr. Charles Q. Peters, a long-time resident of the Canal Zone and the Republic of Panama, to design a coin which might be used for trade on the islands. The result was coconut money, and the initials ‘CQP,’ the designer, appear on the coin to the right of the base of the coconut tree.” Approximately 5,000 of these pieces were minted for Mann in the early 1970s by a company in Minneapolis, Minnesota (thought the article does not say so, it was the medallic firm Wendell-Northwestern, Inc.). “He used them in payment to the Indians for work they had done in support of his tourist business, taking tourists from Port-A-Venier, a tiny island with a landing strip for small planes, to a nearby island where he started the tours. Each coin represented a value of five coconuts, as indicated by the five circles under the coconut tree, or twenty-five cents at the value of five cents per coconut. The meaning of each entry in the design of the coin has significance.” For example, “On the upper-left side of the trunk of the coconut tree is a small ‘V-shaped’ design, indicating an air-orchid” whose name in the Kuna language means “patience” (a tranquilizing tea, which bestows “patience” to the women who drink it, is made from its leaves and petals). Plus, “To the left of the tree is a sea bird the Cuna call ‘ane,’ which means ‘tomorrow.’” The combined symbolism of these motifs conveys the message: “Have patience, you will be paid tomorrow and will receive your five coconuts.” As for the word “SIABIBI”, it “means ‘little cousin’ in the Cuna language — a term of affection, and is also the name of Mann’s tourist boat.” The coin’s lack of success “was inherent in its use. In the beginning, Mann offered to pay wages for work to the Indians with his five-coconut coin as a means for providing the Indians with a practical means of exchange, and of course, he would ‘own’ its distribution. The Indians accepted the new coin with some hesitation and in a couple of days would test the coin by cashing it in for the five coconuts from Mann’s warehouse. Mann ‘made the coins good,’ but when the Indians realized that their wealth was assured and they were not as perishable as coconuts, immediately hoarded them. They also soon discovered that tourists were willing to pay more than the twenty-five cents for them, and circulation ended. What’s left of the ‘coconut money’ remains in the hands of a few Indians, and unknown tourists from all over the world, who have them as ‘mementos’ of their trip to the San Blas Islands!”
But even though the coins did not seem to meet Mann’s initial expectations, as the article clearly indicates, they must have proved popular with collectors and travelers because many more pieces were minted after the article was published. These newer tokens, dating from 1978, 1979, 1980, and 1986 feature a different design on the obverse (the image of “a sailing cayuco (ulu in Cuna)” was replaced with that of a local woman’s face). From Mr. Oded Paz, I obtained the 1971 (actually undated) and 1978 versions of the 5 coconut/25¢ tokens as part of a trade for one of my 2006 Héliopolis coins.
Mr. Plowman later authored his own article about these pieces. Entitled San Blas Merchant Tokens, it appeared in the January 2007 issue of the Isthmian Collectors Club Journal. About the tokens’ creators, he writes that “The Kuna are very protective of their culture, and few non-Kuna are allowed to stay overnight on their islands. John Mann however had established a very good relationship with the Kuna, and his SIABIBI company was one of very few non-Kuna owned businesses allowed in the San Blas islands…Charlie Peters was also known as a friend and guide to the Kuna, so his involvement helped assure the Kuna that the tokens were legitimate.” Though Mr. Plowman has heard some anecdotal stories about the tokens being used as a form of payment down in the islands, he does not think that they ever really caught on as a bona-fide currency. After all, the Kuna initially stockpiled their pieces and then began selling them to visitors. “Knowing that the tokens were not circulating, Mann apparently continued to issue the SIABIBI San Blas tokens for the purpose of selling them to tourists and collectors. As some ICC members may remember, these tokens were sold in uncirculated condition by Panama dealers like Dan Sanders of Numismatica Ltda.” Most likely due to his advancing age, “John Mann closed down his SIABIBI company sometime in the 1980’s and moved to Panama City. He continued to write, lecture and offers tribal liaison and consultant service for passenger ships making calls in the San Blas Islands. He published a small booklet called ‘SIABIBI’S SAN BLAS’ with revised editions in 1981, 1983 and 1984. It is an introduction to the Kuna culture presented from the perspective of a young Kuna girl, and oriented towards tourists that might be about to tour the San Blas islands. I own a copy John Mann autographed in 1997 while working as a guest lecturer in a passenger ship.” In his article, Mr. Plowman describes all of the tokens in great detail. I was surprised to learn that after the 1971 piece was manufactured, “A second token followed in 1977. The design was almost identical, with the only differences being a star and the initials J.A.M. (for John A. Mann) being added to the obverse. Most likely this was done by just modifying the 1971 coins dies.”
Images of some of the San Blas tokens an be viewed at the Web-site of Mr. Jorge Fernández Vidal (http://www.jfvcoins.com/Productos/world_coins=OtherCoins.html), at the Web-site of Mr. Haseeb Naz (http://chiefacoins.com/Database/Micro-Nations/San-Blas-Islands.htm), and at the Web-site of Mr. Peter Geelen (http://www.jezuss.nl/san-blas.htm).Return to the Main Index