Opinion for The Latino Newsletter

Editor’s Note: The Latino Newsletter received this opinion piece over the weekend. We will always publish perspectives on Puerto Rico’s status debate. Too few spaces make room for this conversation.

By Christina Mojica and Javier A. Hernández, Co-Authors of the draft executive order for Puerto Rico’s independence

The “Colonial Means to ‘Decolonial’ Ends” opinion essay, while acknowledging the long-standing federal apathy toward U.S. colonies, exposes a troubling contradiction in the logic of many advocates of “democratic decolonization.” It is the belief that only methods deemed “democratic” within a colonial framework are valid paths to liberation.

This notion is not only historically flawed, it is also dangerously limiting. Colonies are not democracies, and the institutions created by colonial regimes are designed not to dismantle colonialism, but to preserve it. 

The opinion piece critiques two recent policy proposals, including our draft executive order for Puerto Rico’s independence, and suggests that because decolonization would originate from the U.S. federal executive and bypass Puerto Rican “democratic participation,” it undermines self-determination. But this argument ignores a more urgent truth: democracy cannot truly exist or flourish in a colonial context. To insist that colonial peoples must seek freedom only through the very systems that have long denied it is to reduce self-determination to a bureaucratic illusion.

The Trap of Colonial Legitimacy

The authors rightly note President Truman’s concern in 1946 about Congress ignoring Puerto Rico’s will, but they fail to confront the deeper truth: if “consent of the governed” defines democratic legitimacy, why has the U.S. continued to govern Puerto Rico and other territories without it? What recourse do colonial subjects have when their voices are persistently ignored, repressed, and manipulated by the very democracy they are told to trust?

Colonialism is the slavery of nations. Under such an undemocratic condition, the oppressed owe no loyalty to the structures that bind them, nor should they be limited to the colonizer’s tools in seeking their freedom. Puerto Ricans, Virgin Islanders, Chamorros, and Eastern Samoans have not been denied sovereignty because they failed to demand it, but because their demands are inconvenient to American interests.

To say that “only the people can decide” ignores the reality that colonial subjects are often indoctrinated, made dependent, and politically neutralized by the very system they are expected to resist. In Puerto Rico, non-binding plebiscites that are run by corrupt colonial institutions have done nothing to advance decolonization.

Instead, those institutions are dominated by pro-statehood elites who manipulate public resources to preserve the colonial status quo, while the U.S. Congress dismisses every outcome. We support popular participation, but we reject the illusion that colonialism can be voted away through systems designed to sustain it. In this context, it is not undemocratic —it is necessary— to explore alternatives grounded in the national interest of the very power that holds the key to ending colonial rule.

The U.S. Didn’t Ask for a Vote

The irony of labeling our proposal “colonial” is staggering, given that the U.S. imposed its rule over Puerto Rico without ever seeking our consent—from the 1898 invasion to the Foraker Act, the forced imposition of U.S. citizenship in 1917, the Gag Law of 1947, the bombing of Jayuya and Utuado in 1950, and the century-long repression of independence leaders.

Colonialism arrived without democracy and can be undone the same way. Appealing to U.S. interests may seem contradictory, but in a system that has consistently silenced our democratic will, making a strategic, economic case for independence is both pragmatic and necessary.

We are using every available mechanism to challenge colonialism directly.

We do not reject popular participation.

We reject the illusion that colonial systems, which ignore and manipulate our votes, offer a path to genuine freedom.

Reason as Resistance

On October 30, 1950, Puerto Ricans rose in armed rebellion against U.S. colonial rule. The response was brutal: our towns were bombed, our patriots killed, and thousands arrested.

Today, we pursue a different path: a pragmatic appeal to the U.S. government’s economic self-interest. Our draft executive order offers a realistic and viable solution to end Puerto Rico’s colonial status, save American taxpayers over $617 billion, open global opportunities for Puerto Rico, and avoid the political and economic turmoil of an unwanted statehood scenario.

This is not authoritarian.

It is strategic.

It acknowledges that the will of the Puerto Rican people has long been ignored and distorted by colonial institutions posing as democratic. The tragedy is not that independence advocates have proposed such a plan, but that after more than a century, one is still needed.

Decolonization Isn’t a Single Path

The opinion piece also makes an inaccurate comparison between two fundamentally different proposals: our draft executive order —a grassroots effort by Puerto Rican independence advocates to end more than a century of colonial rule— and a federal plan to merge Guam and the Northern Mariana Islands into a single U.S. state to serve American geopolitical interests. Conflating a liberation movement with a top-down strategy obscures the meaning of true self-determination.

This framing also overlooks the powerful sovereignty work happening in Guam, led by groups like Independent Guåhan and the Free Association Task Force, which are not advocating for statehood, but for freedom on their own terms. The same is true of Puerto Rico’s growing independence movement.

To suggest our proposal undermines decolonization simply because it operates outside colonial mechanisms is to confuse genuine liberation with formalities that have long sustained the colonial order.

To insist that freedom must come solely through colonial legislatures, oversight boards, or non-binding plebiscites is to grant the colonizer ultimate authority over the fate of the colonized.

That is not democracy. It is a gilded illusion.

Legitimacy on Our Terms

We reject the notion that a presidential decree for Puerto Rican independence would be illegitimate simply because it bypasses a colonial electoral process. Its legitimacy lies in its purpose: to end colonial rule and recognize Puerto Rico as a sovereign nation.

History supports this approach. The British government granted independence to Jamaica, Barbados, and other Caribbean nations through negotiations and parliamentary action in London (not colonial referendums), yet their sovereignty today is unquestioned.

Demanding a colonial vote as a precondition for liberation ignores the very nature of colonialism. Freedom offered by the colonizer is still freedom, especially when the system in place silences the colonized. Whether it’s with President Trump or the King of Spain, we Puerto Rican independentistas welcome any serious opportunity to reason, advocate, and negotiate for our national liberation.

We support the right of all U.S. colonial territories to pursue freedom —through voting, negotiation, resistance, reason, or direct appeal— even when such efforts defy the expectations of American institutions. People have a right to freedom and democracy, but there is no right to remain a colony or to annex one’s nation into another under the false guise of “self-determination.”

Freedom does not ask for permission.

Clinging to colonial political processes only reinforces colonial rule. It is time to act with boldness and clarity, and to refuse procedural obstacles that stand in the way of true liberation.

This draft executive order is not an affront to democracy—it is a necessary strategy in the absence of it.

If embraced with resolve, it can achieve what plebiscites, petitions, and decades of colonial negotiations have not: a final, irreversible break from colonialism and the beginning of Puerto Rico’s era of national sovereignty.

About the Authors

Christina Mojica is an educator and policy analyst at a think tank, focused on housing, governance, and social impact. 

Javier A. Hernández is a Puerto Rican writer, educator, linguist, and pro-sovereignty activist. He is the author of PREXIT: Forging Puerto Rico’s Path to Sovereignty and Puerto Rico: The Economic Case for Sovereignty.

We want to keep The Latino Newsletter accessible without paywalls. To help, you can donate here. Any amount (one-time or monthly) will keep us going.

What We’re Reading

Puerto Rico Blackout: From NBC News, “The island of Puerto Rico is suffering another island-wide power outage,” as “Luma Energy said the complete interruption to its service began at about 12:40 p.m. Wednesday.”

The Latino Newsletter welcomes opinion pieces in English and/or Spanish from community voices. You can email us here. The views expressed by outside opinion contributors do not necessarily reflect the editorial views of this outlet or its employees.