Inequality,Ethnicity, Political Mobilisation and Political Violence in Latin America: The Cases of Bolivia,Guatemala and Peru*

The paper explores the relationship between political violence and ‘horizontal’ inequality in ethnically‐divided countries in Latin America. The cases studied are Bolivia, Guatemala and Peru. Preliminary results are reported on the measurement of horizontal inequality, or that between groups, defined in cultural, ethnic and/or religious terms. The Latin American cases are shown to be often more unequal than the cases from Africa and Asia included in the wider study of which the work forms a part. The complex relationship between such inequality, ethnicity and political violence is explored historically. Ethnicity is today rarely a mobilising factor in violence in the Latin American cases, but the degree of inequality based on ethnicity is shown to be highly relevant to the degree of violence which results once conflict is instigated. History explains why.     

Military regimes: power and force

Abstract. It is generally held that coups are the start of full military intervention. As a consequence, studies intent on contrasting the performance of 'military' as opposed to 'civilian' governments have used the event of a military coup as the essential criterion for distinction. The evidence clearly shows, however, that the distinction is not so easily drawn. Further, consideration of the only systematic attempt to delineate types of military regimes in respect of civilian involvement suggests that the dichotomised view of military and civilian regimes should be replaced by attention being drawn to power and force in all political systems. This view is supported by a classification of Third World political systems which reflects these two dimensions. Ironically, the study of military governments installed by coups d'état has actually served to obscure the importance of force in politics.