Indigenous Peoples and the State in Latin America: An Ongoing Debate (2000)

Author(s):  
Rodolfo Stavenhagen
Author(s):  
Roberta Rice

Indigenous peoples have become important social and political actors in contemporary Latin America. The politicization of ethnic identities in the region has divided analysts into those who view it as a threat to democratic stability versus those who welcome it as an opportunity to improve the quality of democracy. Throughout much of Latin America’s history, Indigenous peoples’ demands have been oppressed, ignored, and silenced. Latin American states did not just exclude Indigenous peoples’ interests; they were built in opposition to or even against them. The shift to democracy in the 1980s presented Indigenous groups with a dilemma: to participate in elections and submit themselves to the rules of a largely alien political system that had long served as an instrument of their domination or seek a measure of representation through social movements while putting pressure on the political system from the outside. In a handful of countries, most notably Bolivia and Ecuador, Indigenous movements have successfully overcome this tension by forming their own political parties and contesting elections on their own terms. The emergence of Indigenous peoples’ movements and parties has opened up new spaces for collective action and transformed the relationship between Indigenous peoples and the state. Indigenous movements have reinvigorated Latin America’s democracies. The political exclusion of Indigenous peoples, especially in countries with substantial Indigenous populations, has undoubtedly contributed to the weakness of party systems and the lack of accountability, representation, and responsiveness of democracies in the region. In Bolivia, the election of the country’s first Indigenous president, Evo Morales (2006–present) of the Movement toward Socialism (MAS) party, has resulted in new forms of political participation that are, at least in part, inspired by Indigenous traditions. A principal consequence of the broadening of the democratic process is that Indigenous activists are no longer forced to choose between party politics and social movements. Instead, participatory mechanisms allow civil society actors and their organizations to increasingly become a part of the state. New forms of civil society participation such as Indigenous self-rule broaden and deepen democracy by making it more inclusive and government more responsive and representative. Indigenous political representation is democratizing democracy in the region by pushing the limits of representative democracy in some of the most challenging socio-economic and institutional environments.


2019 ◽  
Vol 52 (1) ◽  
pp. 67-89
Author(s):  
Franziska Englert ◽  
Jonathan Schaub-Englert

The new Andean constitutionalism centred around the concepts of plurinationality and decolonization tackles centuries of indigenous subordination and strives for the revaluation of indigenous culture. Territorial autonomy is currently considered a pivotal aspect of materializing these concepts and constitutes one of the most pressing demands of indigenous peoples in Latin America. The revolutionary Bolivian Constitution of 2009 is among the first to offer ways of establishing indigenous territorial autonomies as a form of sub-state territorial authority. Given the legal framework and the fact that three indigenous territorial autonomies (AIOCs) were officially created, Bolivia can be seen as the country with the most advanced conceptualization of indigenous territorial autonomies in Latin America. A closer look at the legal, cultural and administrative realities in Bolivia, however, reveals a different picture. By analyzing national and international law, indigenous cosmovisión and policies for implementation, this article points out six multi-layered perplexities regarding indigenous territorial autonomy, namely (1) the AOICs’ inherent subordination to the State, (2) the irreconcilability of the AIOC-system with indigenous ancestral practices, (3) the hierarchization within demodiversity, (4) the sacrifice of indigenous interests for neo-extractivism, (5) the obstruction of the implementation process by the State and (6) the possible trade-off between de jure and de facto autonomy. We argue that the Bolivian States’ self-imposed objective of overcoming colonialism and establishing plurinationality through AIOCs is not fulfilled. While some of the perplexities identified in Bolivia are clearly related to the MAS’ political-party interests, others have a conceptual and more abstract nature rooted in the contradiction of overcoming colonialism through the State. These findings might also be of importance for decolonization processes in other countries, such as Ecuador.


Author(s):  
Esteban Torres ◽  
Carina Borrastero

This article analyzes how the research on the relation between capitalism and the state in Latin America has developed from the 1950s up to the present. It starts from the premise that knowledge of this relation in sociology and other social sciences in Latin America has been taking shape through the disputes that have opposed three intellectual standpoints: autonomist, denialist, and North-centric. It analyzes how these standpoints envision the relationship between economy and politics and how they conceptualize three regionally and globally growing trends: the concentration of power, social inequality, and environmental depletion. It concludes with a series of challenges aimed at restoring the theoretical and political potency of the autonomist program in Latin American sociology.


1998 ◽  
Vol 30 (3) ◽  
pp. 321-346 ◽  
Author(s):  
Naditn Rouhana ◽  
Asʿad Ghanem

The vast majority of states in the international system, democratic and non-democratic, are multi-ethnic (Gurr 1993). A liberal-democratic multi-ethnic state serves the collective needs of all its citizens regardless of their ethnic affiliation, and citizenship—legally recognized membership in the political structure called a state—is the single criterion for belonging to the state and for granting equal opportunity to all members of the system. Whether a multi-ethnic democratic state should provide group rights above and beyond individual legal equality is an ongoing debate (Gurr & Harff 1994).


Author(s):  
Pascal Lupien ◽  
Gabriel Chiriboga ◽  
Soledad Machaca

2021 ◽  
pp. 026858092199451
Author(s):  
Adrian Scribano

The social sciences in Latin America have always had a special connection with the study and analysis of the place of emotions in the social structuration processes. The aim of this article is to offer a synthetic exposition of some inquiries about emotions and the politics of sensibilities in Latin America, emphasizing those that are being felt in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. To achieve this objective, first we offer a synthesis of the theoretical and methodological points that will guide the interpretation; then we draw on pre-existing inquiries and surveys which allow us to capture the state of sensibilities before and during the pandemic in the region; and finally some conclusions are presented. The work is based on a multi-method approach, where qualitative and quantitative secondary and primary data are articulated in tandem.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document