The friend-enemy distinction:

Comparison of two historical oppositions in Colombia.

Manuel Alejandro Luna Gmez1

Abstract: The main purpose of this essay is to compare the preponderant participations of
Laureano Gmez Castro and lvaro Gmez Hurtado from the opposition in the presidential
periods of Alfonso Lpez and Ernesto Samper. It pretends to show why the incidence of the friendenemy distinction affects with minimal intensity the political system, specifically the regime. The
academic concepts to explain that are provided by Carl Schmitt, lvaro Gmez and Max Weber
with the friend-enemy distinction, regime and legal-rational legitimacy respectively. The research
design of this essay includes character biographies, books about those periods, obtained in the
Library of the university La Sabana, newspaper editorials and scholarly articles obtained in the
Eureka system and Dialnet and documentaries.
Key words: friend-enemy distinction, opposition, Laureano Gmez, lvaro Gmez, regime.
INTRODUCTION.
Something characterized the Colombian politics in the periods of 1942 to 1945 and 1994 to 1995:
an opposition figure from the Conservative Party2 trying to get the fall of the political regime
controlled by the Liberal Party 3 . There were two disputes. Father and son: Laureano Gmez
Castro4 and lvaro Gmez Hurtado5 faced with two different presidents in different times. In first
situation, Colombia was going through the period called the Liberal Republic6 (1930-1946) with

Political science student: University of La Sabana, Cha, Colombia.

Jos Eusebio Caro and Mariano Ospina Rodrguez founded the Colombian Conservative Party in 1849. They made
an institution, which pretends the political, economic and social stability from the religious optic. In addition, they
support an education given by the church.
3
Ezequiel Rojas founded the Colombian Liberal Party in 1848. The ideology of this party was manifested in a text
written by Rojas when he proposed the government program of the president Jos Hilario Lpez. There was
established the defense of rights and freedoms, respect for the law and the separation of church and state.
4
Laureano Eleuterio Gmez Castro (20 February 1889 13 July 1965) was one of the most potent orators of the
Congress of Colombia. He was the 18th president of Colombia (1950-1953). Gmez Castro is considered a radical
leader of the Colombian Conservative Party during the last century.
5
lvaro Gmez Hurtado (9 May 1919 2 November 1995 was a lawyer, politician, journalist and one of the most
important and active member of the Colombian Conservative Party. He tried to be president three times. Gmez
Hurtado was senator, ambassador and one of the writers of the Colombian Constitution.
6
During this period, there were only liberal presidents. Starting with Enrique Olaya Herrera and finishing with Alberto
Lleras Camargo.
2

Alfonso Lpez Pumarejo7 to the head. Then, in 1994, Colombia had elected the third consecutive
liberal president who was Ernesto Samper Pizano8. The common denominators in both cases are
the domination of the Liberal Party and the evident friend-enemy distinction between the president
and the leader of the opposition. This essay is focus on that division.
However, there is something not clear in that context. Tough the opposition can manage the fall
of a ruler from the distinction between friend and enemy; the Regime does not finish, keeps power
and continues remaining to the head of the government. Both oppositions experienced this
problem. While Laureano Gmez achieve the fall of the president Lpez, lvaro Gmez died been
a staunch opponent of Samper. The regime always remained. This essay try to get a conclusion to
explain that because the friend-enemy distinction can threaten the political existence of people or
groups, but big structures (the regime) maintain intact their authority in time. That is why my
question relates to the real impact of the opposition.
How does the opposition influence in a political system through the friend-enemy distinction? The
importance of this research question to the comparative politics is to understand why a political
system given shows a minimal affectation with the intense opposition of outstanding leaders. The
cases of Laureano Gmez and lvaro Gmez serve to explain that situation. Taking in account the
requirements proposed for the friend-enemy distinction, which are the public hostility, the possible
fight and the threat of the opponents political existence; this question applies to the instances I am
analyzing in this essay. Because of my research, the thesis statement answers to the question with
the grade of influence that an opponent can have in the political system, specifically in the regime.
The influence of the opposition through the friend-enemy distinction is not strong enough to
overthrow the regime. The above, because the power of the president lets that the members of the
ruling party keeps their forces in the political conjuncture. It is easy to the government to silence
the criticism from the public opinion. In addition, if the opposition achieve the resignation of a
cabinet member, it does not strongly affect the regime. These causes weaken the opposition and
stop it from generating major changes in the system.

7
8

President of Colombia 1934-1938 and 1942-1945.

President of Colombia 1994-1998.

The main author chosen for this essay is Carl Schmitt9 with his well-known contributions to the
political theory: the concept of the political and the friend-enemy distinction. The used definition
to regime is the same that Alvaro Gmez said ever, so he is another author. Besides, in some
arguments the Weberian concept of legitimacy10 is considered.
The paper is divided in three mainly parts. The first part defines the two principal concepts and
explains the context and the central causes of the antagonism between the conservative characters
and their liberal opponents. Secondly, it describes the combat between the two forces with the
advantage of the regime because its power. Then, the results of the two historical oppositions are
described and their incidence in the political system. Finally, we have the conclusions of the essay.
THE MAIN DETONATING OF THE FRIEND-ENEMY DISTINCTION IN BOTH
SITUATIONS.
To start with, it is important to abstract the friend-enemy distinction of Schmitt and to define
according to lvaro Gmez what the regime is. In politics, the enemy is someone who has
determined hostility to attack the opponent and to threaten the state and the relations of friendship
internal to it. It represents the essence of politics. It is true that Schmitt attributes his distinction to
communities or groups but this essay pretends to make an analogy with people. They show their
incidence in the political system behavior with a great explicitness. The enemy always wants to
extinguish politically the other.
About the regime, lvaro Gmez said that it is a system of compromises and complicities, which
dominates the civilian life. It is composed of several factors operating together: the Congress,
political parties, the official press, some major economic blocs and minority sectors of trade
unions, the church and the guilds. In addition, of course, the government.
Firstly, the antagonism between Laureano Gmez Castro and Alfonso Lpez Pumarejo
began with the insistent warning of the conservative politician about the risk of re-electing
Lpez as president. This event occurred in 1940 when Gmez Castro said in the Senate that the
Liberal Party was trying to add a new and insurmountable problem into the Colombian political
Carl Schmitt (11 July 1888 7 April 1985) was one of the most important German political theorist. He was a jurist
too. Schmitt is recognized because his criticism against the liberalism and his book The concept of the political.
10
The three types of Legitimate Rule is an important contribution of Max Weber to the politics. Weber was a German
sociologist and economist. In this essay, he explains the tripartite classification of authority.
9

situation. That problem was a new administration of Lopez11. In the session of September 27 1940,
Laureano Gmez was emphatic in ruling that the Lopezs re-election as president was a personal
attack as he had argued against the senators Durn Durn and lvaro Daz days ago. The criticism
of Gmez Castro decreased the proportions of the victory of Lpez who won the presidency on
May 3 1942 with 673.169 votes12.
Secondly, the antipathy of lvaro Gmez in front of Sampers government started with the
final determination of the Sampers responsibility in the 8000 process 13 . The authorities
captured Santiago Medina on July 26 1995; he was the treasurer of the campaign Samper
President. The scandal had initiated some weeks ago. It was the detonating of the friend-enemy
distinction between Gmez and Samper. Days before, lvaro Gmez said that Samper was a
prisoner of the regime and now he demanded his resignation. Gmez Hurtado gave credibility
to Medina, who said there were cordial relations between the president and the drug lords
Rodrguez Orejuela since 1993 in an episode known as pacto de Recolectos14. Why does it mean
the beginning of the friend-enemy distinction between the political figures?
It is important to say that the friend-enemy distinction is only possible if there are recognizable
adversaries, a public hostility. The solid opposition of Laureano Gmez against Lpez Pumarejo
was from his position in the Congress and with his editorials in the newspaper El Siglo15 that was
a distinguished communication media of Colombia. lvaro Gmez was retired from politics when
he started his criticism against the president Samper but he continued being a public voice of the
Colombian Conservative Party. He attacks from his newspaper El Nuevo Siglo16 and he always
gave statements contrary to the government through different news agencies like Noticiero 24
horas or Q.A.P. These confrontations started to show us one of the requirements proposed by
Schmitt to talk about the friend-enemy distinction: an opened antagonism. lvaro Gmez wrote
11

Alfonso Lpez Pumarejo had been the president of Colombia between 1934 and 1938. Lpez said in a letter from
New York in 1940 that he was prepared to be the liberal candidate if the President Eduardo Santos support him.
12
Alfonso Lpez Pumarejo became president in 1934 with almost one million of votes. The vote was reduced in this
opportunity.
13
It was one of the most scandalous investigations in Colombia against the president and some politicians. The
accusations aim to Ernesto Samper and his campaign. They were related to drug money supporting the candidate
Samper and other members of the Liberal Party.
14
Santiago Medina said that the president Samper had a meeting with emissaries of the Cali Cartel in Recolectos,
Madrid when he was the ambassador of Colombia in Spain.
15
Newspaper founded by Laureano Gmez and Jos de la Vega in 1936.
16
It is the same El Siglo newspaper but now with the direction of lvaro Gmez.

almost one editorial daily against the regime of the Liberal Party between July 31 and November
2 1995.
Here we have an example:
The Regime is trying to form a climate of opinion among those offensively called the friends
of the president. The Regime achieved that the President was not overthrown. But it hasnt
managed destroy the conviction that he cant stay."
El Nuevo Siglo
Editorial (a part) of October 17 1995
Moreover, the opposition at its high point starts with a momentous event that greatly
influences in the national politics. Although the friend-enemy distinction between Laureano
Gmez and the administration of Lpez Pumarejo was obvious, the murder of Mamatoco17 was
the maximum moment of disagreement. The incidence of the opposition in the regime became
more palpable; this episode is a state crime where some polices killed a man who was conspiring
against the government. Gmez Castro was asking for explanations about the sale of the Handel
shares and now he was attacking the president and the members of the Liberal Party because their
political responsibility. The situation was difficult. Thus, the traditional liberal leaders Eduardo
Santos and Alberto Lleras returned to Colombia from Europe and Washington respectively.
Alfonso Lpez Pumarejo declared the presidential crisis on October 8 1943.
THE FORCE OF THE REGIME: AN UNEQUAL COMBAT.
It is inevitable to think that the battle between government and opposition is unequal. The
principal factors in favor of the regime are the bureaucracy and the control of the principal
institutions that conformed the state. Some ministers as Carlos Lleras Restrepo or Alberto Lleras
Camargo were the defenders of Alfonso Lpez Pumarejo. They were showing gratitude because
the bureaucracy that the Liberal Party had received. In addition, the president used the judiciary
against his opponent Laureano Gmez. A judge sent Gmez Castro to the jail in1944 and the next
day the government liberated him. He had to go into exile on July 2818. Meanwhile, Horacio Serpa
(government minister) and Ramiro Bejarano (director of DAS) supported from their important
positions the actions of the president Samper in front of the growing criticism of lvaro Gmez.

17
18

Francisco A. Prez Mamatoco was a retired boxer and journalist. Police kill him in 1943.
Laureano Gmez firstly was in the embassy of Brazil in Bogot. Then he travelled to Quito, Ecuador.

It is true that the official bureaucracy nourishes the expectative of duration that the regime
can have. The power provides this advantage. Both liberal presidents looked for support with
eminent figures of their party through the bureaucracy. Nevertheless, this alternative does not only
aim to the members of the ruling party. It focusses on the opposition too. Alfonso Lpez and
Ernesto Samper tried to appease the solid attacks of their opponents that way. Lpez offered to
Laureano Gmez a seat in the National Economic Board in 1943 and Samper appointed Daniel
Mazuera Gmez19 in the Ministry of Economic Development in 1994. Laureano Gmez refused
the offering of Lpez; and despite the position of Mazuera in the government, lvaro Gmez
continued criticizing the excesses of the regime. It means that this manner of using bureaucracy
only helps the regime with its own members. Of course, if the convictions of the opposition are
strong enough. So, how is the attack of the opposition?
Definitely, the combat tool of the opposition is the legitimacy crisis that threatens the stability
of the president as head of the government. We are talking about the legitimacy because of the
legal-rational domination proposed by Max Weber. It is based on the bureaucratic domination.
Alfonso Lpez was losing his credibility and legitimacy with the editorials of Laureano Gmez in
El Siglo. For this, there was a concerns environment within the military forces. It was
accompanied by an uprising in July 1944 when the general Digenes Gil detained the president in
Pasto. Lpez managed to control the situation and returned to the government reestablishing his
direction of the regime. The response to Gmez Castro was forceful: Lpez closed El Siglo and
expelled Laureano Gmez from the International Relations Commission.
On the other hand, the incidence of lvaro Gmez in the legitimacy of the president Samper
and in the regime in general was not potent. All forces in the political system supported the
power of the president. Despite the low popularity of Ernesto Samper in the society, the regime
continued controlling the reins of the nation. An important figure for the maintenance of the regime
was the government minister Horacio Serpa Uribe who visited the Congress in order to defend the
interests of Samper. The senators Arias Ramirez, Restrepo Salazar, Martinez Samahan and Gmez
Hurtado 20 were insistent in demanding the resignation of Serpa. Those debates were useless
because the liberals were majority in the Senate with fifty-eight members. There was not an interest

19
20

Daniel Mazuera Gmez is a nephew of lvaro Gmez Hurtado.

The senator is Enrique Gmez Hurtado, the brother of lvaro Gmez Hurtado.

among the public opinion to end the established liberal regime. Neither the students, nor the unions,
nor the military, nor any significant group was really supporting the initiatives of the opposition.
THE POLITICAL ELIMINATION OF THE OPPONENT.
In this section, the political elimination of the adversary represents the end of the friendenemy distinction and therefore the result of both political processes. Laureano Gmez
managed the resignation of Alfonso Lpez on July 19 1945. The Liberal Party kept the Regime
because Alberto Lleras became the president. The consequence of the opposition that lvaro
Gmez promoted was different. Samper did not resign; and gunmen in circumstances not
established killed lvaro Gmez on November 2 1995. Now I am going to extend these ideas.
Laureano Gmez destroyed the political existence of Alfonso Lpez but the liberal regime
continued to the head of the government. After his separation of the presidency, Alfonso Lpez
had a diplomatic position in the government of Mariano Ospina (1946-1950) but he has never
returned to the active political participation. Alberto Lleras was the president of Colombia between
August 7 1945 and August 7 1946. Then, the Liberal Republic finished with the election of a
conservative president.
Without the opposition of lvaro Gmez, the president Samper kept his politically existence
and his presidential period (1994-1994) was completed. The politically process about the
responsibility of Ernesto Samper in the 8000 process was precluded on July 6 1996 with one
hundred eleven in the House of Representatives of Colombia. On the contrary, the judicial process
about the murder of Gmez Hurtado have not showed responsible people. Today, Samper is the
fourth Secretary General of the Union of South American Nations and he has an active political
participation. It seems the demonstration that the incidence of lvaro Gmez Hurtado in the
regime was diminutive.
CONCLUSIONS.
To sum up, the incidence of the opposition of Laureano Gmez, through the friend-enemy
distinction, was not strong enough to finish with the Liberal Republic. Nonetheless, he managed
the resignation of Alfonso Lpez and contributed to the final of the liberal governments one year
later. The result of his antagonism with Lpez is remembered as an important contribution of the
7

conservative leader in the Colombian political conjuncture. His influence is not only related to the
period of violence in Colombia, Laureano participated in important debates in the Senate during
this time and his editorial has a significant content.
In conclusion, the result of the opposition of lvaro Gmez in the political system was the minimal
affectation that there may be with the friend-enemy distinction. Gmez dead and the government
of Samper continued. Despite being one of the most important political men of the las century,
lvaro Gmez could not achieve the end of the liberal regime in the power. Nevertheless, it is
possible that his period of opposition contributes to the return of the Conservative Party to the
presidency in 1998.
It is important to say that the possible factors, which contribute to the permanence of the regime,
are the official bureaucracy, the control of the institutions and the structures of the ruling party.
BIBLIOGRAPHY.
Schmitt, C. (1999). El concepto de lo poltico. Madrid: Alianza Editorial.
Gmez, E. (2011). Por qu lo mataron? Bogot: Controversia editorial.
Abella, A. (2000). Laureano Gmez. Santaf de Bogot: Planeta Colombiana Editorial.
Gmez, A. (1978). La Revolucin en Amrica. Bogot: Editores-Colombia.
Gmez, M. & Snchez, J. (Productores) & Gmez, M. & Betancur, J. (Directores). (2007).
Colombia Vive: 25 aos de resistencia, memorias de un pas sin memoria [DVD]. Colombia:
Caracol Televisin.
Roll, D. (2002). Rojo difuso y azul plido. Los partidos tradicionales en Colombia: entre el
debilitamiento y la persistencia. Bogot: Universidad Nacional de Colombia.
Henderson, J. (1985). Las ideas de Laureano Gmez. Bogot: Ediciones Tercer Mundo.
lvarez, V. (2011). Partido Conservador Colombiano: Emergencia, ideologa y similitudes con
el positivismo de Comte. Noviembre 10, 2015, de Congreso Nacional de Sociologa. Sitio web:
https://www.icesi.edu.co/congreso_sociologia/images/ponencias/8-AlvarezPartido%20conservador%20y%20positivismo.pdf
Tirado, A. (1999). Alfonso Lpez Pumarejo. Revista Credencial Historia.

Restrepo, G. (2000). La Doctrina Conservadora en Revista Cooperativismo y Desarrollo, No. 73,

pp. 61-70.
Santos, E. (2005). Las revolucionaria Repblica Liberal en Revista Credencial Historia, No. 183,
1, Bogot.
http://partidoconservador.com/