Facundo (subtitiled civilization and Barbarism) A book written by Argentinian Domingo Sarmiento in 1845, it was written partly in protest to the regime of Juan Manuel de Rosas who ruled Argentina from 1835-1852. In the book the author explores the issue of civilization versus the cruder aspects of a Caudillo culture of brutality and absolute power. Caudillos are seen as the opposite of education and High Culture and civil stability. Civilization is represented by the metropolitan society of Buenos Aires. Caudillos introduce instability and chaos, which destroy societies through their blatant disregard for humanity and societal progress. In the book, Sarmiento portrays the rise of Juan Facundo Quiroga, an archetypical Argentine Caudillo, his controversial rule, and his downfall. Juan Facundo was all that was wild and untamed in Argentina in opposition to true progress through the common enlightenment of society. The only way to truly achieve progress and a better world were through the taming of such leaders and a common education allowing the common man to philosophically recognize and oppose such exploitation. Although immediately applicable to the Argentinian contemporary day, it is absolutely applicable to the wider social questions facing Latin America as a whole during the mid 1800’s. As caudillos took control and set up authoritarian governments, questions of what is best for the progress of society were largely ignored by the ruling elite for the more immediate goal of exploiting the masses. Facundo, as a critique of both de Rosas and Caudillos at large, introduced an opposition message that promoted an alternative that was more beneficial to society at large. This included education and honest officials who understood enlightenment ideas of European and Classical origin.
Facundo and the Construction of Argentine Culture examines the various fates between 1845 and 1945 of Domingo Sarmiento's seminal Facundo and the role the author and the book played in constructing Argentine culture.
Rojas praises Facundo for its attack on tyranny, but "after 1860 we must take it only as a pragmatic truth favoring our culture due to its deep native emotion, to its popular traditions, its Spanish American language and Argentine ideals--all of which it translates in admirable synthesis..." (p.
Certainly she makes a strong case for the way Sarmiento used the text to further his political career, first to achieve power, then to pertuate his ideas and memory after he was gone.