Indigenous Parties and Democracy in Latin America

In recent years, important indigenous parties have emerged for the first time in Latin American history. Although some analysts view this development with trepidation, this essay argues that the indigenous parties in Latin America are unlikely to exacerbate ethnic conflict or create the kinds of problems that have been associated with some ethnic parties in other regions. To the contrary, the emergence of major indigenous parties in Latin America may actually help deepen democracy in the region. These parties will certainly improve the representativeness of the party system in the countries where they arise. They should also increase political participation and reduce party system fragmentation and electoral volatility in indigenous areas. They may even increase the acceptance of democracy and reduce political violence in countries with large indigenous populations.     

Beyond Rainforests: Urbanisation and Emigration among Lowland Indigenous Societies in Latin America

Indigenous societies across lowland Latin America have recently made impressive political and territorial gains by emphasising their stewardship of and attachment to particular rural landscapes. But surprising new censal and microdemographic evidence shows that these groups have simultaneously been developing a presence in domestic and foreign metropolises. Cities offer employment and advanced education opportunities as well as escape from rural conflicts. We suggest that the dynamics and outcomes of these migrations are distinct from those of other rural Latin Americans. By outlining specific areas in which migration, politics, and territory appear to be interlinked, we seek to stimulate research that engages with these processes and their implications for indigenous advocacy and migration theory.     

Rethinking Indigenous Politics: The Unnoticed Struggle for Self-Determination in Peru

Most scholars characterise Peru as a country with weak indigenous movements, whose demands would have no influence in regional and national policies, even though its socio-economic structures are similar to those of Bolivia and Ecuador, where indigenous movements are stronger. Based on fieldwork in the northern Peruvian Amazon and Lima between 2012–2013 and 2016–2018, this article argues that pro-indigenous legislation enacted as a response to strong indigenous mobilisation as well as the creation of indigenous autonomous governments in the Amazon express an unnoticed struggle for indigenous self-determination. These social phenomena also raise questions about the common assessment of the strength or weakness of indigenous movements.     

Misreading Mao: On Class and Class Struggle

It has been argued frequently that Mao Zedong's thought is a significant departure from classical Marxism. This break, usually dated from the mid-1950s, supposedly occurred in two areas. First, the primacy of the economic characteristic of orthodox Marxism was replaced by a “voluntarism,” which emphasised politics and consciousness. Secondly, whereas classes are defined in economic terms in the classical Marxist tradition, Mao defined them by reference to political behaviour and ideological viewpoint. This definition derives from the primacy Mao is said to have accorded to the superstructure. This article rejects the second of these interpretations and argues that a fundamental continuity exists between Mao's post-1955 propositions on classes and class struggle and those advanced by orthodox Marxism. In conformity with classical Marxism, Mao conceived of classes as economic categories. Further, both Mao and classical Marxism saw classes as active participants in class struggle in the superstructure called into being by the contradiction between the forces and relations of production. Finally, Mao shared with orthodox Marxism the idea that economic classes are represented in the superstructure by a range of political agencies and ideological forms.     

The Reelection Debate in Latin America

The debate over presidential reelection reappeared in Latin America in the last decade, and promises to continue in the years ahead. Arguments in favor contend that the possibility of immediate reelection increases politicians' responsiveness to citizen demands and allows voters the freedom to retain popular incumbents. Arguments against emphasize the danger of abuse of power by incumbents who seek to prolong their tenure. This article illustrates the parallels between these arguments and those made historically regarding the issue. It also suggests that the means by which provisions to allow reelection are adopted can provide valuable signals of their consequences.     

The Struggle for Recognition of the Indigenous Voice: Amerindians in Guyanese Politics

Abstract

In Guyana’s racialised geography, Amerindians live in scattered villages in the vast hinterland that covers 90% of the country. Amerindian iconography is appropriated in state-making, even while Amerindians themselves are consigned to a patron–client relationship with the dominant ‘coastlander’ society. In the late 1950s, Amerindians made up only 4% of the national population but voted as a bloc in the national elections of 1957, 1961 and 1964, rallying around Stephen Campbell, the first Amerindian member of the legislature. Their unified position allowed their political leaders to negotiate a commitment to the settlement of Amerindian land claims as a condition of Independence in 1966. After losing its parliamentary majority in 2011, the coastlander-based party in power has been working to disrupt cohesion among Amerindian community leaders. The government uses a variety of funds to reward community leaders who will sign pre-prepared resolutions at the statutory National Toshaos Council meetings, and denies funds to leaders and communities that protest at government neglect and mismanagement of the traditional areas claimed by the indigenous peoples.     

The resurgence of populism in Latin America

Contemporary manifestations of “neopopulism” are situated in an analysis of the role of political institutions in capitalist societies, and the idea of structural and institutional crisis. It is argued that “populist” and “neopopulist” discourse alike must be understood in terms of their relationship to specific conjunctural projects for the reorientation of capitalist reproduction. This approach directs attention back to the contrasting conjunctures in which classical populist and contemporary neopopulist political projects were launched. It also provides a basis on which contemporary projects which adopt elements of populist strategy and discourse can be compared and evaluated.     

The European Union and Democracy in Latin America

The European Union has developed a significant range of democracy promotion initiatives in Latin America since the 1990s. The E.U.'s approach to democracy building has been seen to possess a number of strengths relative to U.S. policy, especially in connection with grassroots developmental imperatives. European policy itself, however, has a number of limitations. It has inadequately conceptualized the linkages between economic and political dimensions; it has insufficiently recognized the potential benefits of balancing bottom-up and top-down approaches. The E.U.'s influence over Latin American governments has remained more nebulous than that of the United States. European and U.S. policies in Latin America have both rivaled and complemented each other. Understanding this might inform both actors' democracy promotion efforts in the region.     

Globalization and Migration: The Impact of Family Remittances in Latin America

Taking as its point of departure the relationship between migration and globalization, this article highlights the salience of remittances in the national economies of Latin America, especially Mexico, Central America, and the Caribbean. It looks at the various actors that participate in the transfer of remittances and suggests that incorporating migrant labor dynamics as a category of economic integration will reveal a distinct landscape in the economies of Latin America.     

Civilians and the Military in Latin America: The Absence of Incentives

This article argues that civil‐military relations should be conceptualized not only in terms of democratic civilian control but also for effectiveness in implementing a spectrum of roles and missions. It also argues that achieving effectiveness requires institutional development as a necessary but not sufficient condition. Currently in Latin America, the focus in civil‐military relations remains exclusively on civilian control. While there is a growing awareness of the need for analysis beyond asserting control over the armed forces, so far nobody has proposed or adopted a broader analytical framework. This article proposes such a framework, and employs it to analyze differences among four major South American countries: Argentina, Brazil, Chile, and Colombia. The explanation for the differences identified by use of the framework is found in the incentives of civilian elites in Chile and Colombia, who have recognized serious threats to national security and defense.     

Military Entrepreneurs: Patterns in Latin America

Despite the recent shift to democratic regimes and market‐based economies, in many Latin American countries the military retains important economic roles as owner, manager, and stakeholder in economic enterprises. Such military entrepreneurship poses a challenge to the development of democratic civil‐military relations and, by extension, to the development of liberal democracy in the region. While scholars have noted this situation with concern, they have given little attention to distinguishing the different types of military entrepreneurship, which reflect distinct historical patterns and implications. This article identifies two major types of military entrepreneurs in Latin America: industrializers, determined to build national defense capabilities and compete for international prestige; and nation builders, seeking to promote economic development that can foster social development and cohesion. Case studies of Argentina, Brazil, Cuba, and Ecuador demonstrate important differences between these two types in their origins, paths, and political consequences.     

九一一事件后美国对拉丁美洲的政策与拉美的反美主义

本文对九一一以来美国对拉丁美洲的政策及拉美地区出现的反美主义情绪进行了探讨。文章认为,单边主义是美国长期以来对拉美政策的突出特点。九一一后,由于反恐而进行政策调整的需要,布什政府对拉美的单边主义倾向更加明显,不仅表现在国际事务上以美国的意愿行事,而且在外交上有意忽视拉美国家。这种单边政策是激起拉美国家和人民反美主义的最重要根源之一。拉美国家的公众反美情绪不仅表明了其对美国的态度,而且激励了本地区的领导人挑战美国,甚至导致一些国家发生了政治转向。文章还以古巴为特例,分析了美国对西半球这个唯一的社会主义国家的政策,认为布什政府在很大程度上保持了美国对古巴政策的连续性,其主调仍然是强硬的,但另一方面,由于反恐的需要和国内利益集团的促动,美古关系也出现了松动的迹象。