latin_american_political_ideologies.pdf

Latin American Political Ideologies

Page 1 of 18

PRINTED FROM OXFORD HANDBOOKS ONLINE (www.oxfordhandbooks.com). (c) Oxford University Press, 2014. All RightsReserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a title in OxfordHandbooks Online for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy).Subscriber: Centro de Investigacion y Docencia Economicas %28CIDE%29; date: 20 May 2014

PrintPublicationDate: Aug2013 Subject: PoliticalScience,PoliticalTheory,ComparativePoliticsOnlinePublicationDate: Dec2013

DOI: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199585977.013.0019

LatinAmericanPoliticalIdeologiesJosAntonioAguilarRiveraTheOxfordHandbookofPoliticalIdeologiesEditedbyMichaelFreedenandMarcStears

OxfordHandbooksOnline

AbstractandKeywords

ThischapterexplorestheideologicaltraditionsandfamiliesthatweredevelopedinLatinAmerica.Thesecanbedatedbacktocolonialtimesoreventothepre-Hispanicera.However,thischapterfocusesontheideologicalfamiliesthatbecameprominentduringthenationalperiodafterthenewnationsachievedindependence.ThereareseveralsignificantideologicaltraditionsthatweredevelopedinLatinAmericaatthistime.ThearticlediscussesLiberalism,Conservatism,Socialism,Nationalism/Populism,andMulticulturalism.Themainideasofeachoneofthesetraditionsareexploredastheyevolvedinthatpartoftheworld.Thechapterprovidesawideoverviewofthesubject.Keywords:LatinAmerica,Liberalism,Conservatism,Socialism,Communism,Multiculturalism

LATINAmericaisapartoftheWesternworld. Theideologicaltraditionsandfamiliesthatweredevelopedtherepartakeinawiderintellectualandphilosophicaluniverse.FromtheearlystagesofcolonizationoftheAmericas,politicaltheoriesinformedtheactionsoftheEuropeanssettlers.AsAnthonyPagdenasserts:

LiketheRoman,theSpanishEmpirebecame,asmuchforthosewhocameunderitsaegisasforthosewhodidnot,theimageofaparticularkindofpolity.Fornearlytwocenturies,despitethedeclinethatbeganinthe1590s,theSpanishMonarchywasthelargestsinglepoliticalentityinEurope.EvenafterthedivisionoftheHabsburglandsbyCharlesVin1556andtheeffectivelossofthenorthernNetherlandsin1609,itstillcontrolled,untiltheWarofSuccession,morethantwo-thirdsofItalyandthewholeofCentralandSouthAmerica.

(Pagden1998:12)

SeveralLatinAmericanpoliticaltheoristsandtheologians,likeFranciscoClavigeroandJuanPabloViscardodevelopedoriginalargumentsregardingpoliticalauthorityduringthecolonialera.Yet,IwillfocushereontheideologicalfamiliesandtraditionsthatbecameprominentduringthenationalperiodafterthenewnationsachievedindependencefromtheSpanishEmpire.ThereareseveralsignificantideologicaltraditionsthatweredevelopedinLatinAmerica.HereIwilldiscussLiberalism,Conservatism,Socialism,Nationalism/Populism,andMulticulturalism.

LiberalismLiberalismcanbeconceivedasaclearlyidentifiablesetofprinciplesandinstitutionalchoicesendorsedbyspecificpoliticians,publicists,andpopularmovements(Holmes1995:13).Fromaliberalperspective,thehighestpoliticalvaluesarepsychologicalsecurityandpersonalindependenceforall,legalimpartialitywithinasinglesystemoflawsappliedequallytoall,thehumandiversityfosteredbyliberty,andacollectiveself-rulethroughelectedgovernmentanduncensoreddiscussion(Holmes1995:16).

*


Page 2 of 18


TheliberaltraditionhasbeenpresentintheSpanishworldsincetheearlynineteenthcentury.ThetermsliberalismandliberalwerecoinedbytheSpanishCortesinCdiz,whiledraftingthe1812constitution. AftertheirindependencefromSpainintheearlynineteenthcentury,allofthenewnationsofSpanishAmerica(exceptforthebriefandill-fatedMexicanEmpire)adoptedthesamemodelofpoliticalorganization:theliberalrepublic.Alloftherevolutionaryleadersmovedquicklytowriteconstitutions.Almostalloftheseconstitutions:proclaimedtheexistenceofinalienablenaturalrights,(liberty,legalequality,security,property);manyprovidedforfreedomofthepressandsomeattemptedtoestablishjurytrials.Almostallsoughttoprotecttheserightsthroughtheseparationofpowersandbymakingtheexecutivebranchrelativelyweakerthanthelegislature(Safford1995:35960).

ThestrandofliberalismthatwasinitiallypervasiveinLatinAmericawasdevelopedbyFrenchtheoristslikeBenjaminConstantintheaftermathoftheFrenchRevolutionandtheRestoration.NotRousseau,butConstantwouldprovetobethemostrelevantinfluenceforSpanishAmericansintheearlynineteenthcentury.TheuniversalinfluenceofConstantinthe1820sand1830s,Saffordstates,isonlyoneindicationofthehegemonyofmoderateEuropeanconstitutionalideasamongSpanishAmericanintellectuals. TheinfluenceofConstantisimportantbecausemodernliberalismowesmuchtohim. ManyofConstantsideas,particularlythosedevelopedinresponsetotheTerroranditsThermidorianaftermath(suchasthelimitednatureofpopularsovereignty,thefreedomofthepress,theinviolabilityofproperty,andtherestrictionsuponthemilitary),becameincorporatedintheliberaltheorythatstillinformsmanyoftheconstitutionsofdemocraticcountriestoday.

AremarkabletraitofearlyliberalisminLatinAmericawasthatforsometimeitremaineduncontestedbyrivalideologies.Republicanisminthatpartoftheworldmeantliberalrepublicanism(AguilarRiveraandRojas2003).Itwasthesinglepoliticaltheorythatofferedpoliticalelitesaclearblueprint(Constantwroteamanualonconstitution-making)ofnation-building(Constant1820).WhileliberalconstitutionalismwaspervasiveamongtheLatinAmericansthereweresomeimportantdifferenceswiththeirEuropeanmodels.LatinAmericanliberalswereobsessedwithconstitution-making.ThisalsoholdstrueforFranceatthetime,butsomeFrenchliberals,suchasTocqueville,alsodevelopedthemoralandsocialaspectsofliberalism.DeeperphilosophicalreflectionswereuncommoninSpanishAmerica. Theresultwasapeculiarone-sidednessandanaivefaithinthemightypowerofconstitutionstoreshapesocieties.Likewise,whileConstantandotherliberalssupportedreligioustoleration,everywhereinSpanishAmericatheCatholicChurchwaspreservedastheestablishedchurchandotherreligionswerebanned.Earlyliberalsdidnotseeaconflictbetweentheirideasregardingpersonalfreedomandreligiousintolerance.Lpez,thetranslatorofConstantsCurso,omittedthechapteronreligiousfreedomarguingthatsuchatopicwasnotrelevantforSpaniardssincetheyweremostlyRomanCatholics.

EarlyLatinAmericanliberalismfacedmanychallenges.VerysoonaconflicteruptedbetweenSpanishAmericanpolities(corporatistinnature)andliberalpolicies.Liberals,suchastheMexicanJosMaraLuisMora,facedaparadox:inordertocreatealiberalpolity,withalimitedstate,theyhadfirsttocreateapowerfulstatemachinerythatwouldreconstructsocietyfollowingliberallines.After1830,liberalscouldnolongeroverlooktherealityofentrenchedcorporateprivilege,epitomizedbythejuridicalprivilegesofthechurchandthearmyandbythevastecclesiasticalpropertyholdings(Hale2008).Manybecamescepticalofrigidlimitstopoliticalauthority.Yet,thisisnotaparadoxnewtotheliberaltradition.Someoftheoriginatorsoftheliberaldefenceofreligioustoleration,suchasPierreBayle(16471706),wereatthesametimeabsolutists;theyadvocatedtheincreaseofthepowersofthecrown.Politicalopponentsofthechurchnaturallyenlistedthesupportofthesecularpower.Onlyapowerfulcentralizedstatecouldprotectindividualrightsagainstlocalstrongmenandreligiousmajorities(Holmes1995:1920).

Themainideologicalcleavageoftheeraemergedwhenliberalsattemptedtoreclaimanimportantpartofpubliclifefromchurchauthority.Committedtoequalitybeforethelawtheysoughttorepealspeciallawsconcerningthearmyandreligiouscorporations.Thesecularstatesoughtcontrolovereducationandotherpublicservicesthathadtraditionallybeeninthehandsofthechurch.Inmanycountriescivilregistrieswerecreatedtorecordbirthsanddeaths.Civilgraveyardswerealsoestablished.Thispoliticalandideologicaloffensivewascounteredbyaconservativereaction.

Thisfirststageofliberalismcouldbecalleddoctrinaire.Itcameunderattackasearlyasthe1830s.Thefailuretocreateastablepoliticalorderresultedinacritiqueofsomeideas,suchastheprecedenceofindividualrightsandthenecessityoflimitsimposedongovernments.Manyliberalscametotheconclusionthatgovernmentssimplyhadtobestronger.Constitutionsshouldprovideforemergencyprovisionsandstrong,centralized,governmentsto

1

23

4


Page 3 of 18


countertheregionalandpoliticalfragmentationproducedafterindependence.(SimnBolvar,liberatorofSouthAmerica,hadassertedtheseideassince1819,butmanyliberalschoseinsteadtofollowtheexampleoftheUnitedStates,establishingfederalsystems.)Likewise,theelectoralfranchisehadtoberestrictedtopropertyowners.TheregimesofpresidentsBenitoJurezinMexicoandDiegoPortalesinChileareexamplesofthisconservativeliberalism.ConservativeliberalsinLatinAmericastillaimedatconstructingliberalpolitiesbuttheyhadcometorealizetheimportanceofpoliticalorderandstability(Merquior1991:7580).

Bythesecondhalfofthenineteenthcenturyliberalismunderwentinmanycountriesasignificantideologicaltransformation.Manyconservativeliberalsadoptedargumentsfromanon-politicalsocialtheory:positivism(Hale1989).AsHaleasserts:thepoliticalconsensusofthelatenineteenthcenturywasupheldbyasetofphilosophicandsocialideasthatproclaimedthetriumphofscienceinLatinAmerica. EuropeanthinkerssuchasAugusteComteandHerbertSpencerwerehighlyinfluentialamongLatinAmericanintellectualssuchasJustoSierrainMexicoandJosVictorinoLastarriainChile(Sierra2007;VictorinoLastarria2007).Thetransformationintopositivismchangedsomeofthekeyideologicalassumptionsofliberalism.Asasetofsocialideaspositivismclaimedthatsocietywasadevelopingorganismandnotacollectionofindividuals.Thenewadvocatesofscientificpoliticschidedtheoldliberalsfortheiroutmodedmetaphysicbeliefsinnaturalrights.Scientificpolitics,moreutilitarian,assertedthatthemethodsofsciencecouldbeappliedtonationalproblems.Politicswasseenasanexperimentalscience,basedonfacts.Statesmenshouldnolongerbeguidedbyabstracttheoriesandlegalformulaswhichhadledonlytorevolutionsanddisorder(Hale1986).

Asanideologythatplacedindividualsatthecentreofthemoraluniverseandthatsoughttocontaingovernmentsbydifferentinstitutionalstrategies,liberalismfacednumerousobstaclesinLatinAmerica.InthenineteenthcenturytheconservativereactiontoliberalinnovationsproducedcivilwarsinMexicoandColombia.Whileliberalstriumphedintheformercountry,theyweredefeatedinthelatter.Evenvictoriousliberalismchangedintoadifferentideologicalbeing,hardlyrecognizable.However,thistransformationwasopposedinMexicobysomeoftheolddoctrinaireliberals,suchasJosMaraVigil.InArgentinaconservativeliberalismbecamehegemonic,butinthelastdecadeofthecenturyareformistgroupofliberalsrejectedlaissezfaireandproposedsocialreforms.They,however,opposedrevolutionandradicalpoliticalchange(Zimmermann1994).

AtthedawnofthetwentiethcenturyliberalisminLatinAmericawaseitherdisfiguredbypositivismorunderfireforitsattachmentstotheideaoflaissez-faireYet,thingswouldgetworseafter1910.Tworevolutionsproducedatidalwaveofilliberalideas:theMexicanRevolution(1910)andtheRussianRevolution(1917).Thesocialandpoliticalmovementsproducedtwoformidableideologicaladversaries:nationalpopulismandcommunism.Neitherthe1917MexicanConstitutionnortherevolutionaryMexicanstatewereliberalinnatureorcharacter.Norcouldtheybe,sincetheyweretheproductsofanilliberalrevolution.OnceFranciscoI.MaderowasdefeatedandmurderedattheoutsetoftheRevolution,awingtookholdofthemovement.Thatwingsoughtastrong,interventionist,state.Thenewregimehad,asitssubjects,notindividualsbutcorporationsandcollectiveactors.Itaimedtorecreatecommunitiesinordertoincorporatetheminacorporatiststructureofpower.Unlikethe1857liberalconstitution,the1917constitutiondidnotprotectpropertyrights.Itwasunfriendlytoanopenmarketeconomy,althoughnotnecessarilytoamixedversionofcapitalism.Thestatethattookshapeintwentieth-centuryMexicowasinterventionist,notonlyintheeconomicsphere,butalsointhepoliticalandculturalrealms(Garcadiego1999:834).TheMexicanpolitywouldnotbealiberalone,butanational-revolutionaryone.

Startinginthe1920sliberalismanddemocracywereseenasweakanddecrepit.LatinAmericawasnoexception(GarcaSebastinanddelReyReguillo2008).Insomecountries,suchasMexico,theliberalpastofthenineteenthcenturywasreveredwhilecollectivisticpoliceswerepursuedbythegovernment.Inthe1930sColombianPresidentsAlfonsoLpezPumarejoandEnriqueOlayaHerrerasaddledtheirgovernmentstopoliciesthatfollowedtheNewDealintheUnitedStates(Molina1977).Theyassertedthatfreemarketsdonotregulatethemselves,andthattheactionofthestatewasneededinordertocountertheGreatDepression.Abroadcoalitionofworkersandbusinessshouldtakeplace.LpezPumarejostartedtheRevolucinenmarcha,areformistprogrammeinfiscalmatters.

InthetwentiethcenturypoliticalliberalismneverregainedtheprominenceitoncehadinLatinAmerica.Itsurvivedmainlyasasourceofinspirationtosomecriticsofauthoritarianregimes.Democracy,akeycomponentoftheliberaltradition,waslost.Thisisimportant,becausetheweaknessofpoliticalliberalismpreparedthegroundfortheneoliberalrevolutionthatstartedinthe1980s.Therewasnoqualificationorcounterbalancetothemoreextreme

5


Page 4 of 18


versionsofeconomicliberalismthatcamefromwithoutduringtheyearsofstructuralreformintheworld.Inmanycountriesthetermliberalismrelatesonlytoeconomics.However,classicalliberalswerenotlibertarians.Inspiteofthis,theideologicalbeliefthatstateswereinefficientandshouldalwaysbedrasticallyreducedfoundnonativeresistanceinLatinAmerica.AsPrzeworskiargued,neoliberalideologyclaimedthatthereisonlyonepathtodevelopment,anditmustbefollowed.ProponentsofthisideologyargueasiftheyhadaLastJudgementpictureoftheworld,ageneralmodelofeconomicandpoliticaldynamicsthatallowsthemtoassesstheultimateconsequencesofallpartialsteps(Przeworski1992:46).Onlyexperiencewouldprovethatbeliefwrong(Fukuyama2004).Thusdemocracy,aconstitutivepartofliberalism,didnotconstrainmarketreforms.Thetechnocraticelitesthatswiftlyintroducedmarket-orientedreformsintheircountries,whileembracingwhole-heartedlyneoclassicaleconomics,kneworcarednothingofpoliticalliberalism(Centeno1994).Nothingtemperedexcessiveideologicalzeal.Likewise,intellectualliberalismwascluelesswhenitwasconfrontedbyilliberalmulticulturalism.Itwasoverlylegalisticinitsapproach.Andliberalshadveryfewphilosophicalargumentstoconfrontthedemandsforthereestablishmentofspecialrightsandprivilegesthatweremadeinthe1990s.Neoliberalismhasbeenassociatedwithallformsofliberalism.YettheliberaltraditioninLatinAmericaisalive.Ithasbeenenergizedbythechallengesofindigenismandbytherevivalofneopopulisminmanycountries.

ConservatismIn1905thebishopofPasto,Colombia,EzequielMorenowroteinhislastwillthefollowinglines:

liberalismhashadanunspeakablevictoryandthishorrendousfactmakesevidenttheutterfailureofthedesiredconcordbetweenthosethatlovethealtarandthosethathatethealtar;betweenCatholics(thatis,conservatives)andliberals(thatis,atheists).ImustadmitoncemorethatLIBERALISMISASIN,afatalenemyoftheChurchandofthekingdomofJesusChrist.Itwillcausetheruinofpeoplesandnations.SinceIwishtoteachthistruthevenaftermydeath,Idesirethatalargesignbepostedinplainviewintheroomwheremydeadbodywillbelaying,evenatchurchduringmyfuneral,stating:LIBERALISMISASIN.

(Palacios1995:189)

BishopMorenosindictmentofliberalismwassharedbymanyconservatives.ForthemostparttheconservativetraditioninLatinAmericawasnon-secular.ItwascriticallylinkedtoreligionandtotheRomanchurch.ThedefenceofCatholicismoftenentailedadefenceofthesocialorderthatprevailedduringthecolonialpast.Conservativesvaluedthestabilizingrolethatthechurchplayedincolonialsocietyandregardedthatinstitutionasanecessaryintermediatebody.WhiletherootsofconservativeideologycanbetracedbacktothepracticesandideasthatSpainandPortugalbroughttotheNewWorld,conservatismonlybecamefullyfledgedafterindependence(Wiarda2001).Conservatismisanideologythatrejectsradicalchangeandinnovations.Thespecificityofhistoryandexperienceisacommontraitofconservatism(Nisbet1986).

SincetheliberalismofthefoundersofthenewcountrieswasmoderateandrejectedtheexcessesoftheFrenchRevolution,inthebeginningtherewasnoconservativereactiontoindependence.Furthermore,foratime,anideologicalconsensusexistedregardingthestatusofthechurchandthepoliticalroleofthecatholicreligioninthenewnations.Thus,inLatinAmericatherewaslittleenthusiasmforthewritingsoftheTraditionalistwriters,suchasJosephdeMaistreandLouisdeBonald.Forsometimemoderateliberalismwasanumbrella.Evenoneofthemostimportantconservativefiguresofthenineteenthcentury,theMexicanLucasAlamn,onlybecametrulyconservativeafter1847.

Conservatismproperbeganonlywhentheoriginalideologicalconsensusbrokedown.Liberalseverywherelaunchedpoliticalandsocialreformstosecularizetheirsocieties.Thismovementwasvigorouslyopposedbyconservativeseverywhere.LatinAmericanssharewithotherconservativesarejectionofradicalchange.Thesecularizingenterpriseoftheliberalreformerswasseenbyconservativesasrecklessanddangerous.AsmanyLatinAmericannationsfailedtocreatestablerepresentativegovernments,conservativesblamedtheliberalsfortheinabilitytoproducepoliticalorder.AsAlamnarguedin1853,thestablebasesofsocialandpoliticalorderweretobefoundincolonialsociety(Alamn1885).However,liberalshadrecklesslydestroyedthecorporateorganizationofsociety(AguilarRivera2008).

Conservativeideologysoughttopreserveorrestoretheplaceandstandingofthechurchinsocietyandto


Page 5 of 18


preventfurthersecularization.Insomecountries,suchasColombiaandMexico,civilwarswerewagedbetweenconservativesandliberals.Asaresultofideologicalpolarization,Mexicanconservativesbecameevermoreradical.IfMaistreandBonaldhadbeenabsentduringthefoundationofthenewnations,they(alongwithotherminorTraditionalistssuchastheAbbThorel)wererediscoveredduringthemidcentury.Inthelate1840sMexicanconservativespublishedscathingattacksintheirdailyElUniveralagainsttheideasofthesocialcontract,individualrights,andpopularsovereignty(Palti1998).Thiswasanonslaughtagainsttheprinciplesofmodernrepresentativegovernment.Suchcritiqueismostremarkable,sinceatthetimeconservativesinEuropewerefightingtostaythedemocratictide.Thefoundationaldebatesoverrepresentativegovernmentbelongedtotheeighteenthcentury.However,themostradicalwingoftheLatinAmericanconservativetraditionwasannihilatedinthecivilwarthatensuedinMexico.ConservativesreceivedafatalblowwhentheAustrianEmperorMaximilianwasdefeatedandshotin1867.

However,attheturnofthenineteenthcenturyconservatismwasaliveinLatinAmerica.Forinstance,in1903aChilean,AlbertoEdwards,arguedinhisBosquejohistricodelospartidospolticosthatthenationalcrisesthatChilehadexperiencedwereduetothedisplacementoftheconservativetraditionandtothedemocraticturnofliberalism(Edwards1903).Liberalshaddeliveredthecountrytothecorruptedmasses.Asaresult,theyhadweakenedtheprincipleofauthority.Strongmenfromthepast,suchasthenineteenth-centuryrulerDiegoPortales,wereneededtoreassertthisprinciple.Edwardscalledfortheretrievaloflivetraditionsandfeelingsthatconstitutedtheinnerandvitalspiritofapeople,unlikethedeadletterofalienlaws.

EdwardswasnottheonlyLatinAmericanconservativewhobelievedthatstrongmenwerethekeytosocialandpoliticalorder.TheVenezuelanLaureanoVallenillaLanzwroteCesarismodemocrticoin1919.VallenillaLanzclaimedthatpoliticalchaosafterindependencewasanaturalSpanishAmericanphenomenon(VallenillaLanz1991).Stronggovernmentscommandedbycaudillos,notbyunrealisticwrittenconstitutions,wereneededtoaddressthisproblem.VallenillaLanzusedsociologytoestablishthatcaudilloswereanecessityinLatinAmericatopreventspontaneousanarchy.HismodelinturnwasJosAntonioPez,astrongmaninvolvedinattainingVenezuelanindependence.

Conservatismespousedareactivekindofnationalism.InthebeginningitwasarticulatedasameanstocountertheculturalinfluenceofAnglo-Americanprotestantculture. TheSpanishlegacywasconceivedasabulwarkagainsttheinvasionsofthematerialisticcultureofthenorth.Yet,inthesecondhalfofthetwentiethcenturyaconservativemixtureoflibertarianeconomics(HayekandtheChicagoSchool)andtraditionalideaswasproduced.JaimeGuzmn,aChileanlawyer,wasthebestexampleofthisideologicalsynthesis.Guzmnwasveryinfluentialinthedraftingofthe1980ChileanconstitutionduringthedictatorshipofAugustoPinochet(Cristi2000:68).Inthe1970sthemilitaryregimesoftheSouthAmericadevelopedadoctrineofNationalSecurity.ItsinspirationcamefromtheforeignpolicyoftheUnitedStatesduringtheColdWarera.Accordingtothisdoctrine,themainaimofgovernmentswastopreservedomesticorderandtopreventcommunistsubversion.Thisdoctrinegavethemilitarythetaskofdefendingwesternvalues,suchasChristianity(Garcia1991).

Somefamilieswithintheconservativetraditionwerestronglyanti-individualisticandfavouredcorporatistarrangements.SomeconservativesdrewinspirationfromtheSpanishmodernizingdictatorshipofthegeneralMiguelPrimodeRivera(192330).Corporatismandnationalismhadanaffinitywithfascism.ThusinseveralcountriesintheyearsleadingtotheSecondWorldWaranumberofconservativesespousedsympathytowardsfascistItalyandNaziGermany.SomelocalfascistsgroupsaroseinMexicoandSouthAmerica. Whensocialismenteredthestageconservativeshadonemoreideologicalenemy.LatinAmericanconservatismisstronglyanti-communist.Thus,duringtheColdWar,conservativestookthesideoftheUnitedStates.Anti-communismwasstrongerincountrieswheresocialistandcommunistorganizationshadasignificantpresenceandwhereleft-wingguerrillasoperated.

SocialismAccordingtoVincentGeoghegan,allformsofsocialismincludethreebasicingredients:acritique,analternative,andatransitiontheory(Eccleshalletal.1999:119).Thatis,theymakethedefectsofasocietyevident,theyproposeabetterarrangementofthingsandtheypointatthewaystobringabouttheseimprovements.Socialismdeploysanegalitariancritiqueofcapitalism.Itportraysitasasysteminwhichaminorityownsthegreatestshare

6

7


Page 6 of 18


ofwealthofsocietyandinwhichthemajoritysufferspoverty.Socialismalsodecriescapitalismbecauseitallegedlycreatesisolatedandegotisticalindividuals.AsFreedenasserts,thesocialistcorecontainsfiveconceptsorconceptualthemes:theconstitutivenatureofthehumanrelationship,humanwelfareasadesirableobjective,humannatureasactive,equality,andhistoryasthearenaof(ultimately)beneficialchange(Freeden1996:25).

IdeologicallyandpoliticallytheLatinAmericanLeftcanbebrokendownintofourgroups:traditionalCommunistparties,thenationalistorpopulistleft,thepolitical-militaryorganizations,andtheregionsreformists(Castaeda1994:19).Withinthesocialistideologicalfamily,Marxismhasbeenthemostimportantmember,butnottheonlyone.SocialisminLatinAmericadatesbacktothenineteenthcentury.AfewintellectualstherewerefollowersofFrenchutopianideas,likethoseespousedbySaint-SimonandProudhon.WhilemanyintellectualswereacquaintedwithMarxswritings,Marxismdidnotmakemuchheadway.Incontrast,Positivismwasamoreinfluentialsocialtheory.TheEuropeanrevolutionarymovementsof1848hadsomeimpactontheregion,butuntiltheendofthenineteenthcenturysocialistideasattractedonlyfashionablecuriosityandregisteredlittleimpactinLatinAmerica(JorrnandMartz1970:271).

Thingsbegantochangeattheendofthecenturywithlarge-scaleimmigrationfromsouthernEuropetoArgentina,Chile,andUruguay.ThesocialismthatemergedinLatinAmericaatthetimereflectedthecountriesoforiginoftheimmigrantworkersaswellastheideasandmovementsprevailingthere(Wiarda2001:219).InItalyandSpainanarchismandanarchistmovementswerestrong,thusanarchismhadasignificantinfluenceonearlyLatinAmericanMarxismandunionism.Anarchismsemphasisonviolenceasaninstrumentofpoliticalandsocialchangeaffectedthedevelopmentoflabourmovementsinseveralcountries.WriterssuchasFerdinandPelloutierandGeorgesSorelwerealsoinfluential.ArgentinaandUruguayhadsmallanarchistmovementsasearlyas1870(Wiarda2001:221).Likewise,therewasanarchistinfluenceinChile,Peru,andMexico.

InArgentina,JuanB.Justo,amedicaldoctor,foundedthefirstsocialistparty(PartidoSocialistaArgentino)inLatinAmericain1895.JustoreadMarxinGermanandtranslateditintoSpanish.JustoandhisgrouphelpedtofoundsimilarsocialistmovementsinChile,Bolivia,andUruguay.JustowasinspiredbytheIIInternational,butlaterMarxistsconsideredhimaspartlyliberalandtooeclectic(Lwy1982:16).Forexample,hewasinfavouroffreetrade.AdissenterfromJustosideologicalline,LuisEmilioRecabarren,foundedamoreradicalparty(PartidoObreroSocialista)inChilein1912.RecabarrenproducedaMarxistreadingofChileshistory.ThepartybecametheChileanCommunistPartyin1922.

InLatinAmerica,asintherestoftheworld,the1917Russianrevolutionwasaturningpoint.Intheaftermathoftherevolution,communistpartieswerecreatedinArgentina(1918),Mexico(1919),Brazil(1921),andmanyothercountries.However,theirmembershipwasreduced.Thelargestparty(theChileanCommunistParty)hadlessthan5000members.Theseearlycommunistpartieswererivenbyideologicaldifferences,rivalriesamongleadersandnumerousschismsmainlythosedividingsocialist,communists,andanarcho-syndicalistsaswellasvarioussubgroups(Wiarda2001:224).Inspiteoflocaldifferences,LatinAmericancommunistpartieshadtodealwiththeincreasinglydetailedorthodoxiesemanatingfromMoscow(Wiarda2001:224).Ideologically,theSovietinfluencewasimportant.Itgavetheearlyorganizationsaparticularoutlook.Therewereseveralreasons.First,theCominternpressedthelocalorganizationstogetridofdemocratic-socialists,Trotskyites,andotherswhodidnotconformtotheSovietversionofMarxism.Second,duringthefirstyearsthelocalcommunistpartiesdrewideologicalguidancefromthedecisionsoftheThirdInternational.TheCominternissuedtwodocumentsin1921and1923thatpertainedinparticulartoLatinAmerica. Theseresolutionsurgedcommuniststoforgealliancesbetweentheworkingclassesandthepeasantry.Classallianceswereconceivedaspartofanuninterruptedrevolution.ItwasarguedthatLatinAmericansocietiescouldtransitdirectlyfrombackwardanddependentcapitalismtothedictatorshipoftheproletariat.Theneedforanintermediatestageofindependentcapitalismwasdeniedbecausethelocalbourgeoisiescolludedwithimperialism.Thecallforimmediaterevolutionreinforcedtheanarchistideologicallegacyanddiscouragedstrategiesofcooperationamongsocialclasses.

Yet,itwasatthistimethatanefforttoproduceanindigenousMarxisminLatinAmericabeganwiththePeruvianJosCarlosMaritegui(1894-1930).Mariteguibecameasocialistin1918andhediscoveredMarxismandcommunismduringalongtriptoEuropeintheearly1920s.WhenhereturnedtoPeru,hejoinedtheworkersmovement.In1926hefoundedAmauta,aliteraryandpoliticalmagazine.HewasstronglyimpressedbytheFrenchsocialistHenriBarbusseandtheItaliancommunistAntonioGramsci.Indeed,MariteguiwasadiscovererofGramscisrevisionistMarxism,inwhichGramsciurgedaconquestofthecommandingheights,includingcultural

8


Page 7 of 18


andeducationalinstitutions,longbeforethatapproachwaspopularizedintheUnitedStatesandEurope(Wiarda2001:227).MariteguispoliticalthoughtfusedMarxismandtheculturalandtraditionalpracticesofindigenouspeoples.InhisinfluentialSieteensayosdeinterpretacindelarealidadperuana(1928)hearguedthataprogressivebourgeoisie,withanationalfeeling,liberal,anddemocratic,hadneverexistedinPeru(Maritegui1979).However,hisgreatestcontributionwastoadaptMarxismtoPeruviansociety.SinceLatinAmericahadverylittleindustrializationandalimitedindustrialproletariattherevolutionaryclasswasabsent.Theanswertothisvoidwasinthenativepeoples.Mariteguisawinthepre-ColumbiancollectivismofthedescendantsoftheIncasapotentialforsocialism.Mariteguiassertedthatincacommunismcouldserveasthefoundationofsocialism.Hebelievedthatacombinationofstudents,intellectuals,thesmallworkingclass,andthegreatmassofindigenouselementscouldsuccessfullycarryoutaMarxistrevolution(Wiarda2001:,28).TheemphasisonthepeasantryandcollectivismpresagedeventsinChina,whoserevolutionsharedmanyofthesameprinciples.AsWiardaasserts,MariteguisideologicalsynthesiswasthefirstattempteverinLatinAmericamaybeanywhereintheThirdWorldtoadaptMarxianprinciplestoindigenousrealities.RatherthanslavishlyechoingMarxsprecepts,MariteguiactuallybuiltaLatinAmericanrealitythelargeindigenouspopulationsofPeruintotheMarxianequation(Wiarda2001:,229).

WhenNaziGermanythreatenedtheSovietUnioninthe1930s,MoscowchangedtheCominternspolicytowardsLatinAmerica.Insteadofseekingimmediaterevolution,communistpartiesweretoformbroadclassallianceswithreformistanddemocraticpartiestoopposefascism.Americanimperialismwasnottheprimaryevil.Startingin1935,thestrategyofthePopularFrontchangedtheideologicallinesofcommunistpartiesinLatinAmerica.Ideologically,theneedtogothroughanationalstageofdemocraticandindependentcapitalismwasreasserted.Communistpartiesmoderatedtheirradicalideology,acceptedmorenationalisticthemesandsoughttobecomelegal.Thisstrategyincreasedtheirlegitimacyintheeyesofotherpoliticalactors.

TheprocessofideologicalconformityamongLatinAmericancommunistpartiesacceleratedafter1936.TheleadershipbecameincreasinglyauthoritarianandsubservienttoMoscow.Stalinsdoctrineofrevolutionbystageswasadoptedaswellashisideasregardingthefourcoresocialclasses:proletariat,peasantry,pettybourgeoisieandnationalbourgeoisie.Stalinsdoctrineassertedthatconditionsforasocialistrevolutioninbackward,semifeudalsocietieswerenotripe(Lwy1982:30).

Leftistoppositiontocommunistpartiessoonappeared.ThemostimportantdissentersweretheTrotskyites.ForatimetheLatinAmericanfollowersofLeonTrotskysawthemselvesasheirsoftherevolutionaryideasofthe1920s.Inparticular,theyclaimedMariteguiastheirprecursor.

AnideologicalshiftwithincommunistpartiesoccurredwhentheColdWarbegan.Manycommunistpartieswereonceagainmadeillegal.ThewartimealliancesofthePopularFrontcametoanend.Whilethecommunistswerepersecutedandindecline,thesocialistsandsocialdemocratswereascendantinthe1950s.However,the1959Cubanrevolutionchangedtheideologicalmake-upofLatinAmericansocialisminaradicalmanner.CubabecamethefirstMarxist-LeniniststateintheWesternhemisphere.Cubassocialism,nationalism,anddefianceoftheUnitedStatesbecameverypopularinLatinAmerica.Also,theCubanrevolutioninspiredandandoftensponsoredavarietyofimitatorsthroughoutLatinAmerica(Wiarda2001:,237).CubareinvigoratedMarxistthoughtandactioninLatinAmericaandalsocreatednewdivisionswithinsocialism.FidelCastrosrevolutionarygrouprejectedtheevolutionaryblueprintoftraditionalcommunism.Therevolutionwouldperformthetasksordinarilyassignedtomodernnationalcapitalism.TheCubanrevolutiondemonstratedthatarmedstrugglecouldbeasuccessfulroadtoanewsocialorder.Therewere,afterall,shortcutstocommunistsociety.ThesuccessofarmedstruggleinCubaencouragedtheappearanceofinsurgentgroupsinseveralLatinAmericacountries.Asaresult,startingin1959LatinAmericanMarxismbegananewrevolutionarycycle.Manyoftheideasof1920scommunismwereretrieved.ThemostrepresentativefigureofthisstageofLatinAmericanMarxismwasanArgentinean,ErnestoCheGuevara(192867).Guevara,akeyactorintheCubanrevolution,elaboratedatheoryofruralguerrillawar.Hedevelopedtheideaofaninsurgencynucleus(foco)inthecountryside.Accordingtotheseideas,asmallnumberofpersonscouldtriggerasuccessfulrebellioniftheychosecarefullytheiroperationalgrounds.Hepreachedbyexampleandhimselfledrebelguerrillasinseveralcountries.

LegalsocialismalsoreceivedablowwhenthedemocraticallyelectedgovernmentofpresidentSalvadorAllendewastoppledbyamilitarycoupinChilein1973.TheimpactofAllendesfallwastodiscreditreformistsocialistsandtohardentheradicalsoftheundergroundmilitaryorganizations.WhilethesuccessoftheSandinistarevolutionin


Page 8 of 18


Nicaragua(1979)gavesomeencouragementtoleftistinsurgentgroupsinothercountries,mostattemptstooverthrowgovernmentsbytheuseofviolencefailed.GuevarahimselfwaskilledinBoliviabythemilitaryin1967.TheidealofrevolutionbegantoloseitsappealinLatinAmerica.Yet,newideologicalsynthesesappeared.SuchisthecaseofLiberationTheology:afusionofMarxismandChristianthoughtthatwasdevelopedinBrazil,Mexico,andothercountries.Catholicreformistactivistswerealsopersecutedbymilitaryregimes.TheywentundergroundwheretheymetactivistsfromtheLeft.TheyalsodiscoveredMarxism(Meyer1999:314).Politicalrepressionencouragedreligiousactiviststoacceptviolenceasanacceptableformofpoliticalaction.LiberationtheologyadoptedtheclassstruggleasananalytictoolandemployedMarxismasthescientificmethodtoaccountforsocialfacts.

ThefalloftheBerlinWallin1989wasacataclysmiceventforsocialisminLatinAmerica.Bythe1990s,MarxisminLatinAmerica(andelsewhere)wasinsteepandprecariousdecline.Almosteverywheredemocracyandfreemarketsappearedtohavetriumphed(Wiarda2001:239).TheLatinAmericanLefthadbeencompletelyandutterlydefeated(Castaeda1994:3).Manyoldsocialistpartiesevenchangedtheirnames.IdeologicallytheaxiomsofMarxismwerecalledintoquestion.From1989to1994itappearedasiftheonlyroadopentoLatinAmericansocialismwassomekindofsocialdemocracy.However,againstallodds,theCubancommunistregimeofFidelCastrodidnotcollapse.Andin1994theMexicanZapatistarebelsstartedanarmedmovement,whichsoughttodefeattheMexicanarmyandcaptureMexicoCity(PrimeraDeclaracin1994).WhilethearmedstageoftheZapatistarevoltwasbrief,althoughnotbloodless,therebelssignalledthatutopiawasnotunarmed.TheideologicaldiscourseoftheZapatistassoonchangedfromclassicalMarxism-LeninismtoIndigenism,butthemovementeffectivelystalledthefledgingideologicalturnoftheLefttowardsreformism.TheCubanrevolutiongainedasecondwindandthebuddingcriticismofCastrosregimeceased.TheZapatistademonstratedthatanilliberalideologicaloptionwaspossibleafterthefallofsocialism.Also,itshowedthat,notwithstandingthedemiseofMarxism,manyformersocialistsinLatinAmericawerenotwillingtoforsakesomeofitsideologicaltenets,suchastheideaofrevolution.Morebroadly,thevoidleftbycommunismandMarxismwasfilledbyMulticulturalismandIndigenism.Asinotherpartsoftheworld,ex-Marxistsembracedvariousformsofrelativismandpostmodernismratherthananon-Marxistversionofuniversalisticegalitarianism(Barry2001:4).

ThedownfallofMarxistideologyleftoneofthetraditionalgroupsintheLeftalmostuntouched:thepopulists.Inthelastdecadeofthetwentiethcentury,populismregainedpoliticalandideologicalstrength.Populistdiscoursehadbeenoutoffashionsincethe1980s,butitcamebackinthewakeofneoliberalism.Somepopulistleadershavesoughttocreateanideologicalsynthesisbetweensocialismandnationalism.Forexample,theformerVenezuelanpresidentHugoChveznamedtheideologyofhisregimethesocialismofthetwenty-onecentury.ChvezadmiredtheCubanrevolution.Anti-imperialismisakeytenetofchavismo.Likewise,formerMarxists,suchasthesociologistMartaHarnecker(formerstudentoftheMarxistphilosopherLouisAlthusser),havebeenattractedtothepopulismofHugoChvez.

NationalismandPopulismThe1910MexicanRevolutionwasaturningpointintheideologicaldevelopmentofLatinAmerica.Mexicomadeitsowncontributiontotheobsolescenceofliberalism.Whilefascistorsocialistpartiesandmovementsfoughtliberalgovernmentsinothercountries,Mexicoestablishedarevolutionarystatethatwasnotsocialist,fascist,orliberal.Thatpoliticalregimewasideologicallyeclectic:itdidnotopposeelections,butelectoralprocesseswerenotthesourceofitslegitimacy.Itwasnationalistic,populist,corporatist,andanticlerical(Knight1986).Itfavouredstateinterventionintheeconomy.Keytransnationalindustries,suchasforeignoilcompanies,wereexpropriatedbythegovernmentinthe1930s.Asinglepartyruled.The1917constitutionembracedbothindividualismandcollectivism.Revolutionariesclaimedthattheaimsoftherevolutionhadbeendemocracy,thefightagainstinjustice,politicaloppression,andexploitation(Crdova1989:58,Crdova1973).Ideologically,theMexicanRevolutionsharedsomeideaswithotherideologicalfamiliesbutitdidnotbelongtoanyofthem.Duetothesereasons,theMexicanRevolutionwasastrongsourceofilliberalinfluencefortherestofLatinAmerica.Itofferedothercountriesathirdwayamongcompetingworldideologies.

TheideologyoftheMexicanRevolutionhadasignificantimpactonthePeruvianintellectualVctorRalHayadelaTorre.HayadelaTorrefoundedapoliticalparty,AlianzaPopularRevolucionariaAmericana(APRA),in1924.ThispartybecameoneofLatinAmericasfirstgenuinelymass-basedpoliticalpartiesandaninspirationtootherleft-of-

9


Page 9 of 18


center,reformistpartiesinothercountries(Wiarda2001:229;Kantor1953).APRAsideologyembracedanti-imperialism,socialjustice,agrarianreform,andPan-LatinAmericanism.APRAcreatedacorporatistinternalstructure,withorganizedsectionsforyouth,women,peasants,workers,andintellectuals(Kantor1953:131).Thepartybelievedinparliamentaryanddemocraticmethodsandrejectedrevolution.APRAalsobecameamemberoftheSocialistInternational,anorganizationofsocial-democraticpartiesthatbelievesindemocraticsocialreform.

Oftennationalismandpopulismhavebeencloselyrelated.SuchwasthecaseofthecardenismoinMexicoandtheperonismoinArgentina.TheregimeofGetulioVargasinBrazilisalsoconsideredaspopulist.GetlioVargas,apoliticianfromtheprovinceofRoGrandedoSulcametopowerbymilitaryfiatthatdeposedtherulingpresidentin1930(Braun2008:372).Startingin1937VargaslaunchedatransformationoftheBrazilianregime.HisEstadoNovolasteduntilhewasoustedin1945.

CrdenaswaspresidentofMexicofrom1934to1940.Crdenaslaunchedanambitiousprogrammeofagrarianreform,campaignedthroughoutthecountry,bothbeforehiselectionandafter,andnationalizedtheoilindustryfromforeigncompanies.Crdenasbarnstormedthecountry,descendingonremoteregionsandobscurepueblos,meetingpeasantdelegations,fixinglocalproblems,inscribinghispersonalityinthecollectivememoryofcommunitieswhichhadneverbeforeseenastategovernor,letaloneapresident(Knight1998:236).Healsoestablishedsocialisteducationinpublicschools.Asdidotherpopulistleaders,CrdenasattemptedtoreformandexpandthepubliceducationalsystemtobalancetheinfluenceoftheCatholicChurch.Cardenistapolicieselicitedvigorouscriticismandopposition(Crdova1974).

However,theheydayofpopulismtookplacebetween1940and1960.Thisperiodsawpopulismemergeasthemainformofpoliticsinmanycountries;inothers,itchallengedtraditionalleaderstobecomemorerepresentative(Conniff1991:11).InArgentinaJuanDomingoPernwonpowerin1946andthenwasreelectedin1952.Heruleduntil1955whenhewasoustedbyamilitarycoup.TheregimesofVargasandPerndraftednewlawsthatexpandedexecutiveauthorityandallowedthemtostayinpowerlonger(Braun2008:379).

Inthe1990spopulistleaderspursuedneoliberalreforms,asinthecaseofArgentina(SalMenem)andPer(AlbertoFujimori)(Knight1998:2447).Likewise,inthefirstdecadeofthetwenty-firstcentury,populismhasregainedmomentum,asanideologyandasapoliticalmovement.PopulistleadershavecometopowerinVenezuela(HugoChvez),Bolivia(EvoMorales),Ecuador(RafaelCorrea),andelsewhere.

Asanideology,populismremainselusiveandhighlycontroversial.Morethanasetofideas,populismseemstobeapoliticalstyle.YetitisanenduringtraitoftheLatinAmericanideologicallandscape.AsKnightassertedmorethanadecadeago:pronounceddead,buried,unlamented,withastakethroughtheheart,populismreturns,likethelivingdeadofLatinAmericanpolitics,tohauntthesentientworld,undeterredbythebrightdawnofdemocracyandneo-liberalism(Knight1998:226).BothLeftandRighthaveusedpopulistargumentsindifferentpoliticalandsocialsettings.Thus,thereseemstobeanideologicalindeterminacyinpopulism.Somescholarshavesoughttodefinetheconceptwithoutmuchsuccess(Wiles1969).Moreover,someacademicsbothdistrustanddislikepopulism(Canovan1991).Forexample,GuidoGermanideplorestheauthoritarianstrainsofpopulism(Germani1962).Formanyobserverspopulismhasstronglynegativeconnotations.Yet,populismhasrecentlyattractedmorefavourableviews.Thus,ErnestoLaclauattemptstoshowthatpopulismhasnoreferentialunitybecauseitisascribednottoadelimitablephenomenonbuttoasociallogicwhoseeffectscutsacrossmanyphenomena.Populismis,quitesimply,awayofconstructingthepolitical(Laclau2005:xi).Yet,whilepopulismdoesnothavetheideologicalcoherenceofliberalismorsocialismitembodiessomeideasthatarecommontomostpopulistmovements.Keyamongthemistheideathatthereisaclosebondbetweentheleaderandthepeople.Populismoffersaparticularlyintenseformofbonding,usuallyassociatedwithperiodsofrapidmobilizationandcrisis(Knight1998:227).Populismcreatesadichotomouspoliticalworld,wherethepeopleconfronttheother:foreigners,traitors,theoligarchs,etc.Forthisreason,populismeasilyconvertsintochauvinism.Italsoadoptsananti-institutionalstancesincethepopulistleaderormovementrepresentsarepudiationofentrenchedvestedinterests(Knight1998:230).Socialharmonyisofteninvokedbypopulistleaders.Thusthereisananti-pluraliststrainpresentinpopulistideology.Theaimofeliminatingthesourcesofsocialconflictservetojustifytheexclusionofcertainsocialactorsfromlegitimatepoliticalparticipation.Thepeopleandnationareoneandthesame,anorganicunitythattranscendsindividualmembers.Thereforethenationsharesacommonhistoryanddestiny.Thereisasingleidentityembodiedbythepopulistmovementorleader.ForbothpopulismsoftheLeftandtheRight,universalideologiessuchasliberalismandsocialismareathreattonationalunity(Zanatta2008:,3307).


Page 10 of 18


Historically,populismwasarepudiationofthoseforceshinderingpopularrepresentation,socialmobilityandrisingstandardsoflivingforthemasses.Almostalltheearlypopulistmovementscontainedamixtureofreactionaryandprogressivesentiments(Conniff1982:,5).WhatarethemaintraitsofLatinAmericanpopulismasanideology?AccordingtoConniff,socialintegrationofthemassescanberegardedastheideologyofpopulism.Whilepopuliststendedtodrawuponeclecticphilosophicalsources,thecallforsocialintegrationwascrucialtotwentieth-centurypopulismbecauseitsimultaneouslysatisfiedthedesirefororganicsociety,addressedthesocialquestion,promisedcitizenparticipationingovernment,andprovidedawinningstrategyforreform-mindedgroupstocometopowerpeaceably (Conniff1982:11).Populismbothrejectedoligarchicgovernmentandcommunistrevolution.Itsoughtamiddleground.Italsocreatedanewawarenessamongthemasses,whichhasbeenoneofitsenduringlegacies.Itencouragedstudyoffolkwaysandpopularartformsthesearchforapopularcultureansweredanexistentialneedtodefinethepeoplewhoseroleinnationallifewasexpanding,andinwhosenamethepopulistcampaigned(Conniff1982:21).

Neo-IndigenismoandMulticulturalismLatinAmericahasseeninrecentdecadesawaveofconstitutionalreform. Transitionstodemocracyofteninvolvedrewritingcharterstoendauthoritarianregimes.Amongthereformsintroducedintheconstitutionsareculturalrightsforminoritiesaswellasreferendaandotherdirectdemocracymechanisms.Overthepast15yearssevenLatinAmericancountries(Bolivia,Colombia,Ecuador,Mexico,Nicaragua,Paraguay,andPeru)adoptedormodifiedconstitutionstorecognizethemultiethnic,multiculturalnatureoftheirsocieties.Whilemanycountrieswheredemocraticrulehasbeenwellestablishedforalongtimehavedebatedtheseprovisionsfordecades,manyLatinAmericannationshavemovedswiftlytointroducethemintheircharters.SomeofthemostdramaticandunexpectedachievementsintheconstitutionalrecognitionofculturaldifferenceshaveoccurredinLatinAmerica(vanCott2000).Theideologyofneo-Indigenismosupportsmanyofthesereforms.Multiculturalismhasbeen,forthemostpart,anintellectualenterpriseofAnglo-Americanpoliticalphilosophersandsocialtheorists(Taylor1994;Kymlicka1995;Tully1995).However,notallsourcesofneo-Indigenismoareforeign.LatinAmericanintellectualsfashionedIndigenismointhefirsthalfofthetwentiethcentury.IndigenismorejectedtheEurophilicpoliticaltraditionsofthepastandturneditsattentiontotheIndian,

bothasasymbolofthenationaltypeandtheobjectofreform.Thoughtheysharednocoherentideology,revolutionaryIndigenistaswereunitedbytheirsympathyfortheIndianandtheirdesiretoincorporateIndiansintoareconstructedmodernnation,inwhichlivingIndiansweretreatedwithrespectanddignity,andtheirtraditionsaccordedrespectasthetruenationalpast.

(Dawson2004:,xivxv)

NotonlyJosMaraArguedasinPer,butalsoManuelGamioinMexicoplacedtheindigenouspeoplesatthecentreofnationalidentity(Dawson1998,2004:3127). WhileoldIndigenismowasconceivedasanideologicaltoolfornation-building,thenewIndigenismodoesnotpropoundtheethnicintegrationofindigenousminoritiesbutseeksinsteadtoestablisharegimeofseparateculturalrights,recognition,autonomy,andself-determinationforthesegroups. Neo-IndigenismoinLatinAmericaalsopartakesfromabroaderinternationalmovementthataspirestopromoteandprotecttherightsoftheworldsfirstpeoples(Niezen2003:4).Indigenismattheglobalscalereferstoaprimordialidentity,topeoplewithprimaryattachmentstolandandculture,traditionalpeoplewithlastingconnectionstowaysoflifethathavesurvivedfromtimeimmemorial(Niezen2003:3).

WhilesomeAmericanacademics,suchasIrisMarionYoung,havebeenboldintheirproposalsforgrouprightsandinstitutionsthatencompassnewunderstandingsofculturaldiversity,theinstitutionalarrangementsoftheUK,theUnitedStates,andevenCanadahavenotseenasharpdeparturefromthemodelofliberaldemocracy(Young1990).Muchofthemulticulturaltheoryremainsconfinedtoprofessionaljournalsandcampuses.Atthesametimethatmanycountriesarestrugglingtoestablishliberalconstitutionsafterdecadesofcommunistormilitaryrule,politicaltheoristsintheWestwererejectingpreciselytheseideals.Forinstance,Tullyarguedthat

constitutionsarenotfixedandunchangeableagreementsreachedatsomefoundationalmoment,butchainsofcontinualinterculturalnegotiationsandagreementsinaccordwith,andinviolationof,theconventionsofmutualrecognition,continuityandconsent.Insum,asthepeopleremovemodernconstitutionalismfromitsimperialthroneandputinitsproperplace,whatremainstobeseenlookstome

10

11

12

13


Page 11 of 18


liketheoutlinesoftheblackcanoeindawnsearlylight.

(Tully1995:1834)

Ifequalitybeforethelaw,commoninstitutionsandindividualrightsarenotdefiningtraitsofmodernconstitutionalism,thenwhatis?AccordingtoTully,

acontemporaryconstitutioncanrecognizeculturaldiversityifitisconceivedasaformofaccommodationofculturaldiversity.Itshouldbeseenasanactivity,aninterculturaldialogueinwhichtheculturallydiversesovereigncitizensofcontemporarysocietiesnegotiateagreementsontheirwaysofassociationovertimeinaccordwiththeconventionsofmutualrecognition,consentandcontinuity(Tully1995:184).

Theresultofthisapproachistoseeconstitutionalismasmerelyoneofmanydiscoursesavailabletoculturally-situatedpersons.Therefore,forTully

Insteadofagrandtheory,constitutionalknowledgeappearstobeahumbleandpracticaldialogueinwhichinterlocutorsfromnearandfarexchangelimiteddescriptionsofactualcases,learningastheygoalong.Accordingly,thelanguageandinstitutionsofmodernconstitutionalismshouldnowtaketheirdemocraticplaceamongthemultiplicityofconstitutionallanguagesandinstitutionsoftheworldandsubmittheirlimitedclaimstoauthoritytothethreeconventions,justlikealltheothers.

(Tully1985:1856)

Tullyaimstodescribeapost-imperialviewofconstitutionalism(Tully1985:186).

Thesetheoriescan,andhave,inspiredconstitution-makersinLatinAmericaandothercountries. Westernpoliticaltheoriststellconstitution-makersinLatinAmericathattheoldideaofconstitutionalismwillnotworkanymore.Thosecountries,theyargue,wouldbebetteroffiftheywouldletgotheidea.WilliamGalstonarguesthattheconclusionsofliberaltheory,whatevertheymaybe,aremanifestlyinadequateasblueprintsforpracticalpolicymakinginthepost-ColdWarworld(Galston2002:63).

Aswehaveseen,duringtheearlynineteenthcentury,LatinAmericanconstitution-makerslookedforadviceinEuropeandtheUnitedStates.BookssuchasBenjaminConstantsHandbookofConstitutionalPoliticswereavidlyreadbypoliticianseagertolearnhowtodraftliberalconstitutions.Whilesomeoftheinstitutionsofrepresentativegovernmentwerethenquitenew,becausenotfortyyearshadelapsedsincetheUSConstitutionhadbeenenacted,LatinAmericanstookatfacevalueallthetheoriesthatcamefromFranceandNorthAmerica.Withafewexceptions,suchasSimnBolvar,theylackedacriticalperspectivetoassesswhatwasofferedasafool-proofconstitutionalmodel.Perhaps,atthebeginningofthetwenty-firstcentury,thesamephenomenonisoccurringagain.ManyLatinAmericanpoliticiansandlegalscholarshaveacceptedtheideologyofliberalpluralism,multiculturalcitizenship,orlegalpluralism.Suchanideologyhasbecomethephilosophicalfoundationofneo-Indigenismo.

Inspiteoftheactualshortcomingsofconstitutions,untilveryrecentlymostLatinAmericansrecognizedasvalidtheinheritedidealsofnineteenth-centuryliberalconstitutionalism,suchasequalitybeforethelawandapolitical(notcultural)notionofcitizenship.Thedistancebetweenidealandrealitywasseenasachallengethathadtobebridged.HereentersAnglo-Americanmulticulturalism.SuchtheoriesfoundakeenearamongLatinAmericanelites.Unlikepreviousanti-liberalmovementsthatdirectlychallengedliberaldemocracyandcapitalism,multiculturalismdoesnotpresentitselfasarivalofliberalism.Itdisguisesitselfasareformmovementwithinliberalism.Atthestartingpointofhistheoreticalvoyage,WillKymlickaacknowledgedthathisbrandofliberalismwasdifferentfromwhatLatinAmericanshaduntilthenconsideredasliberalism.Inhisseminalbook,Liberalism,CommunityandCulture,Kymlickaarguedthat:

Myconcerniswiththismodernliberalism[fromJ.S.MilltoRawlsandDworkin],notseventeenth-centuryliberalism,andIwanttoleaveitentirelyopenwhattherelationshipisbetweenthetwo.Itmightbethatthedevelopmentsinitiatedbythenewliberalsarereallyanabandonmentofwhatwasdefinitiveofclassicalliberalism

(Kymlicka1989:10).

14


Page 12 of 18


Thismoveistelling,sinceneitherJohnStuartMillnorJohnRawlssawthemselvesasdepartingfromthetraditionofLocke,Monstesquieu,orTocqueville.Previouscriticsofliberalismhadbeenopeninacknowledgingthattheywerenotliberals,butsomethingelse(Holmes1993).However,Kymlickaandothersinhiscampdressedtheirtheorywiththerobesofliberalism.

Bythetimemulticulturalismbecameprominentintheacademicworld,relativismhadspreadwidelyinLatinAmerica.HowthishappenedisnotclearandanaccountoftheriseofrelativisminLatinAmericaandelsewherefallsbeyondthescopeofthischapter.Aftersuccessivewavesofcolonizingideologies,liberalism,positivism,Marxism,populism,etc.relativismcapturedtheimaginationofLatinAmericans.Whilerelativismalsomadeinroadsincountrieswhereliberaldemocracywaswellestablished,inLatinAmericaitfoundafertilesoiltogrow.SinceliberalisminSpanishAmericawasmainlyimportedfromFrance,itwasmostlyconcernedwithconstitutionallimitationsofpower,notwiththephilosophicalfoundationsofliberalism.Also,thememoriesofinjusticescommittedagainsttheindigenouspeoplesinthepast(andpresent)contributedtothesuccessoftheagendaofmulticulturalism.Inmostcountriesguiltwaspervasiveandpoliciessuchassymbolicrecognitionaffordedacost-effectivemeanstoappeaseit(AguilarRivera2001).

Multiculturalismcalledintoquestionthehistoricallyunfulfilledobjectivesofachievingequalitybeforethelawandtosubjectallcitizens,includingthemostpowerfulamongthem,toasinglebodyofnorms.Traditionally,therichandpowerfulhavemanagedtoexemptthemselvesfromthecommonlaws.Ifthisistrueeverywhere,itisevenmoresoinLatinAmerica.Thefoundingideaoflegalequalitywasthattheserightsshouldbeassignedtoindividualcitizens,withnospecialrights(ordisabilities)accordedtosomeandnotothersonthebasisofraceorgroupmembership.

Specialself-governmentrightsforminoritiesarewell-knowninLatinAmerica.Beforeindependenceinthenineteenthcentury,Indianslivedinseparatetownsandenjoyedsomedegreeofself-government.Theseweretherepblicasdeindios.Thisarrangementfollowedthecommonpracticeamongempiresthroughouthistoryofrulingoutsidetheircoreareabyrecognizing(orcreating)localleaderswhowereexpectedtomaintainorderandproducesomeamountintaxesortribute.TheSpanishcolonialauthoritiesconsideredIndiansaspermanentlyunderageandthereforetheymeritedpaternalisticprotection.Thetermlegalpluralismconnotesthesimultaneousexistenceofdistinctnormativesystemswithinasingleterritory,aconditionusuallyassociatedwithcolonialrule(vanCott2000:209).Todaymanymulticulturalistsseektorevivepremodernwaysofthinkingaboutpoliticalauthority.

Manyconstitution-makersaroundLatinAmericaseethemselvesaspartakinginabroaderideologicalmovementofpost-nationalistconstitutionalism.Theyhavelearnedthatpost-nationalistconstitutionsrejectuniversalisticnotionsofcitizenshipbasedexclusivelyonuniformlyappliedindividualrightsandemphasizemultipleformsofcitizenshipthroughavarietyofinstitutionsandautonomousdomainsofsovereigntythatmaximizetheeffectiveparticipationofdiversegroupsinsociety.ThisbrandofconstitutionalismarguesthattheWesternconstitutionaltraditionlacksaconceptionofculturallyalienatedpeoplesorgroups.Oldconstitutionalismwas,allegedly,developedtofacilitatecontestationwithinaculturallyandsociallyhomogeneouspoliticalcommunity.Whilethisargumentisamistakenreadingofthehistoricalrecord(Katznelson1996:13158),itiswidelyacceptedinLatinAmerica.Formulticulturalconstitutionalism,democraticdeliberationunderstoodasthereasonedexchangeofargumentsisinadequate.Instead,deliberationbecomesanewformofculturaldialogue.AccordingtoTully,

Theexchangeofpublicreasonsalsocannotbeseparatedfromthecultural,linguistic,ethnic,andgenderofthoseparticipatingorfromtheirsubstantiveconceptionsofthegood,astheearliertheoristsofdeliberationsometimesassumed.Justasdeeplyingrainedsexist,racist,anddiversity-blindattitudescanoperatetoexcludeoppressedandsubordinatedpeople,theycanalsooperatetodiscountandignoretheirmodesofargumentationoncetheyareincluded,bothinpracticeandintheoriesofdeliberation.

(Tully2002:224)

Notonlyistheexclusionofculturalgroupsaproblemforpost-nationalistconstitutionalism.Eveniftheexcludedcanexercisepowerovertheirlives,theissueofculturalassimilationstillremains.Activeparticipationwillnotsuffice.

Conclusion

15

16


Page 13 of 18


TheideologicaltraditionsofLatinAmericacanbedatedbacktocolonialtimesoreventothepre-Hispanicera.SomescholarsarguethatthewholeideologicalevolutionofLatinAmericawasdeterminedattheonsetbythepoliticalcultureoftheSpanishsettlers.(Wiarda2001:19112).ForRichardMorse,forexample,thekeytounderstandingSpanishAmericaliesintheSpanishpatrimonialstate(Morse1954,1964,1989).TheStatewasembodiedinthepatrimonialpoweroftheking,whowasthesourceofallpatronageandtheultimatearbiterofalldisputes.Withoutthepresenceoftheking,thesystemcollapsed.AccordingtoMorse,SpanishAmericanleadersinthenineteenthcenturywereconstantlytryingtoreconstructthepatrimonialauthorityoftheSpanishcrown.OnefactorobstructingthereconstructionofauthorityalongtraditionalSpanishlines,Morseargues,wasthemeddlingofWesternconstitutionalideas.Anglo-Frenchliberalconstitutionalismwithitsemphasisontheruleoflaw,theseparationofpowers,constitutionalchecksonauthorityandtheefficacyofelectionsstoodasacontradictiontothosetraditionalattitudesandmodesofbehaviourwhichlivedinthemarrowofSpanishAmericans.Becauseliberalconstitutionalismwasill-adaptedtotraditionalSpanishAmericanculture,attemptstoerectandmaintainstatesaccordingtoliberalprinciplesinvariablyfailed(Safford1995:416).Theauthorityofimportedliberalconstitutionalideas,whileinsufficienttoprovideaviablealternativetothetraditionalpoliticalmodel,wasoftensufficienttounderminethelegitimacyofgovernmentsoperatingaccordingtothetraditionalmodel.Yet,thisinterpretationisover-deterministicandfailstoaccountforideologicalchangeandinnovationinthatpartoftheworld.ThepoliticalideologiesthatdevelopedinLatinAmericaovertime(liberalismatfirst,followedbyconservatismandsocialism)hadasignificantimpactandbecameincorporatedintothepoliticalrules,institutions,anddiscoursesofdifferentcountries.Theseideologicalfamiliesofteninterbredandproducednewhybrids.Butthen,suchisthecaseintherestoftheworld.

ReferencesAguilarRivera,J.A.2001.ElFindelaRazaCsmica:ConsideracionessobreelEsplendoryDecadenciadelLiberalismoenMxico.Mxico:Oceano.

AguilarRivera,J.A.2008.Lasideologaspolticas:delametamorfosisalatransformacindelliberalismo.Pp.22949inHistoriaGeneraldeAmricaLatina,vol.7LosProyectosNacionalesLatinoamericanos:SusInstrumentosyArticulacin,18701930,eds.E.AyalaandE.Posada.Madrid:UNESCO/Trotta.

AguilarRivera,J.A.andR.Rojas.(eds.)2003.ElRepublicanismoenHispanoamrica.Mexico:FondodeCulturaEconmica.

Alamn,L.1885.HistoriadeMxico,vol.V.Mxico:ImprentadeJ.M.Lara.

Barry,B.2001.CultureandEquality.Cambridge,MA:HarvardUniversityPress.

Brading,D.1988.ManuelGamioandofficialIndigenisminMexico,BulletinofLatinAmericanResearch,7(1):7589.

Braun,H.2008.PopulismosLatinoamericanos.Pp.37194inHistoriaGeneraldeAmricaLatina.AmricaLatinadesde1930,vol.8,eds.M.PalaciosandG.Weinberg.Madrid:UNESCO/Trotta.

Brea,R.2006.ElprimerliberalismohispnicoylosprocesosdeemancipacindeAmrica18081824Mexico:ElColegiodeMxico.

Canovan,M.1991.Populism.London:JunctionBooks.

Castaeda,J.1994.UtopiaUnarmed.TheLatinAmericanLeftaftertheColdWar.NewYork:Vintage.

Centeno,M.A.1994.DemocracywithinReason.UniversityPark,PA:PennsylvaniaStateUniversityPress.

Conniff,M.L.1982.Introduction:Towardacomparativedefinitionofpopulism.Pp.330inLatinAmericanPopulisminComparativePerspective,ed.M.L.Conniff.Alburquerque:UniversityofNewMexicoPress.

Conniff,M.L.1991.Introduction.Pp.121inPopulisminLatinAmerica,ed.M.L.ConniffTuscaloosa:UniversityofAlabamaPress.


Page 14 of 18


Constant,B.1820.CursodePolticaConstitucional.TranslatedbyMarcialAntonioLpez.Madrid,ImprentadelaCompaa.

Constant,B.1988.PoliticalWritings.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.

Crdova,A.1973.LaIdeologadelaRevolucinMexicana.LaFormacindelNuevoRgimen.Mexico:Era.

Crdova,A.1974.LaPolticadeMasasdelCardenismo.Mexico:Era.

Crdova,A.1989.LaRevolucinyelEstadoenMxico.Mexico:Era.

vanCott,D.L.2000.ApoliticalanalysisoflegalpluralisminBoliviaandColombia,JournalofLatinAmericanStudies,32(1):20734.

Cristi,R.2000.ElPensamientoPolticodeJaimeGuzmn.Santiago:LOM.

Dawson,A.S.1998.Frommodelsforthenationtomodelcitizens:indigenismoandtherevindicationoftheMexicanIndian,192040,JournalofLatinAmericanStudies,30(2):279308.

Dawson,A.S.2004.IndianandNationinRevolutionaryMexico.Tucson:UniversityofArizonaPress.

Daz-Polanco,H.2006.ElogiodelaDiversidad.Globalizacin,MulticulturalismoyEtnofagia.Mexico:SigloXXI.

Dodge,G.H.1980.BenjaminConstantsPhilosophyofLiberalism.AStudyinPoliticsandReligion.ChapelHill:TheUniversityofNorthCarolinaPress.

Eccleshall,R.,V.Geoghegan,R.Jay,andR.Wilford.1999.IdeologasPolticas.Madrid:Tecnos.

Edwards,A.1903.BosquejoHistricodelosPartidosPolticos.Santiago:G.Miranda.

Freeden,M.1996.IdeologiesandPoliticalTheory:AConceptualApproach.Oxford:ClarendonPress.

Fukuyama,F.2004.State-Building,GovernanceandWorldOrderintheTwenty-firstCentury.Ithaca:CornellUniversityPress.

Galston,W.A.2002.LiberalPluralism.TheImplicationsofValuePluralismforPoliticalTheoryandPractice.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.

Garca,A.L.1991.LaDoctrinadelaSeguridadNacional(19581983).BuenosAires:CentroEditordeAmricaLatina.

GarcaSebastin,M.andF.delReyReguillo.(eds.)2008.Losdesafosdelalibertad.TransformacinycrisisdelliberalismoenEuropayAmricaLatina.Madrid:BibliotecaNueva.

Garcadiego,J.1999.Dndequedelliberalismo?Pp.7990inRecepcinyTransformacindelLiberalismoenMxico.HomenajealProfesorCharlesA.Hale,eds.F.Escalante,M.delRefugioGonzlez,J.ZoraidaVzquez,etal.Mexico:ElColegiodeMxico.

Gauchet,M.(ed.)1980.BenjaminConstant:DelaLibertchezlesModernes.Paris:LeLivredePoche.

Germani,G.1962.PolticaySociedadenunapocadeTransicin:delaSociedadTradicionalalaSociedaddeMasas.BuenosAires:Paids.

Hale,C.H.1986.PoliticalandsocialideasinLatinAmerica,18701930.Pp.367441inTheCambridgeHistoryofLatinAmericaVol.IV,ed.L.Bethell.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.

Hale,C.H.1989.TheTransformationofLiberalisminLateNineteenth-CenturyMexico.Princeton:PrincetonUniversityPress.

Hale,C.H.2008.EmilioRabasaandtheSurvivalofPorfirianLiberalism.Stanford:StanfordUniversityPress.

Harnecker,M.2002.HugoChvez.UnHombre,unPueblo.LaHabana:EditorialdeCienciasSociales.


Page 15 of 18


Hofmann,E.1980.LesPrincipesdePolitiquedeBenjaminConstant,2vols.Geneve:Droz.

Holmes,S.1984.BenjaminConstantandtheMakingofModernLiberalism.NewHaven,CT:YaleUniversityPress.

Holmes,S.1993.TheAnatomyofAnti-liberalism.Cambridge,MA:HarvardUniversityPress.

Holmes,S.1995.PassionsandConstraint.OntheTheoryofLiberalDemocracy.Chicago:UniversityofChicagoPress.

JorrnM.,andJ.D.Martz.1970.LatinAmericanPoliticalThoughtandIdeology.ChapelHill:UniversityofNorthCarolinaPress.

Kantor,H.1953.TheIdeologyandProgramofthePeruvianApristaMovement.Berkeley:UniversityofCaliforniaPress.

Katznelson,I.1996.LiberalismsCrookedCircle.Princeton,NJ:PrincetonUniversityPress.

Knight,A.1986.TheMexicanRevolution,2vols.NewYork:CambridgeUniversityPress.

Knight,A.1998.Populismandneo-populisminLatinAmerica,especiallyMexico,JournalofLatinAmericanStudies,30(2):22348.

Kymlicka,W.1989.Liberalism,CommunityandCulture.Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress.

Kymlicka,W.1995.MulticulturalCitizenship.Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress.

Kymlicka,W.andM.Opalski.(eds.)2001.CanLiberalPluralismbeExported?WesternPoliticalTheoryandEthnicRelationsinEasternEurope.NewYork:OxfordUniversityPress.

Laclau,E.2005.OnPopulistReason.London:Verso.

Levene,R.1956.ElMundodelasIdeasylaRevolucinHispanoamricanade1810.Santiago:EditorialJurdicadeChile.

Llorens,V.1967.SobrelaaparicindeLiberal.Literatura,Historia,Poltica:RivistadeOccidente.Madrid:n.p.

Lwy,M.1982.ElMarxismoenAmricaLatina.Mexico:Era.

Maritegui,J.S.1979.SieteensayosdeinterpretacinsobredelaRealidadPeruana.Mexico:Era.

Merquior,J.G.1991.LiberalismOld&New.Boston:TwaynePublishers.

Meyer,J.1999.HistoriadelosCristianosenAmricaLatina.Mexico:Jus.

Molina,G.1977.LasIdeasLiberalesenColombiade1935alainiciacindelFrenteNacional.Bogot:EdicionesTercerMundo.

Morse,R.1954.TowardatheoryofSpanishAmericangovernment,JournaloftheHistoryofIdeas,15:7193.

Morse,R.1964.TheheritageofLatinAmerica.Pp.15969inTheFoundingofNewSocieties;StudiesintheHistoryoftheUnitedStates,LatinAmerica,SouthAfrica,CanadaandAustralia,ed.L.Hartz.NewYork:Harcourt,Brace&World.

Morse,R.1989.SoundingsoftheNewWorld.CultureandIdeologyintheAmericas.Baltimore:JohnsHopkinsUniversityPress.

Niezen,R.2003.TheOriginsofIndigenism.HumanRightsandthePoliticsofIdentity.Berkeley:UniversityofCaliforniaPress.

Nisbet,R.1986.Conservatism:DreamandReality.Minneapolis:UniversityofMinnesotaPress.

Pagden,A.1998.SpanishImperialismandthePoliticalImagination.NewHaven,CT:YaleUniversityPress.


Page 16 of 18


Palacios,M.1995.EntrelaLegitimidadylaViolencia.Colombia,18751994.Bogot:Norma.

Palti,E.(ed.)1998.LaPolticadelDisenso.LaPolmicaenTornoalMonarquismo(Mxico,18481850)ylasAporasdelLiberalismo.Mxico:FondodeCulturaEconmica.

PrimeraDeclaracindelaSelvaLacandona.1994.Mexico,January.

Przeworski,A.1992.Theneoliberalfallacy,JournalofDemocracy,3(3):4559.

Rod,J.E.1900.Ariel.Montevideo:Colombino.

Safford,F.1995.Politics,ideologyandsocietyinpost-independenceSpanishAmerica.Pp.347421inTheCambridgeHistoryofLatinAmerica,Vol.3,ed.LeslieBethell.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.

Sarmiento,D.F.1845.Facundo.CivilisacioneBarberie.Santiago:ImprentadelProgreso.

Sierra,J.2007.Thepresentera.Pp.27589inNineteenth-CenturyNationBuildingandtheLatinAmericanIntellectualTradition.AReader,eds.J.BurkeandT.Humphrey.Indianapolis:HackettPublishing.

Taylor,C.1994.Multiculturalism.Princeton:PrincetonUniversityPress.

Tully,J.1995.StrangeMultiplicity.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.

Tully,J.2002.Theunfreedomofthemodernsincomparisontotheiridealsofconstitutionaldemocracy,ModernLawReview,65(2):20428.

VallenillaLanz,L.1991.CesarismoDemocrticoyOtrosTextoCaracas:BibliotecaAyacucho.

VargasLlosa,M.1996.LaUtopaArcaca.JosMaraArguedasylasFiccionesdelIndigenismo.Mexico:FCE.

Vliz,C.1994.TheNewWorldoftheGothicFox.CultureandEconomyinEnglishandSpanishAmerica.Berkeley:UniversityofCaliforniaPress.

VictorinoLastarria,J.2007.InvestigationsregardingthesocialinfluenceoftheConquestandtheSpanishColonialsysteminChile.Pp.74101inNineteenth-CenturyNationBuildingandtheLatinAmericanIntellectualTradition.AReader,eds.J.BurkeandT.Humphrey.Indianapolis:HackettPublishing.

Villoro,L.1998.EstadoPlural,PluralidaddeCulturas.Mexico:Paids.

Wiarda,H.J.2001.TheSoulofLatinAmerica.TheCulturalandPoliticalTradition.NewHaven:YaleUniversityPress.

Wiles,P.1969.Asyndrome,notadoctrine:Someelementarythesesonpopulism.Pp16379inPopulism.ItsMeaningandNationalCharacteristics,eds.G.IonescuandE.Gellner.London:Macmillan.

Young,I.M.1990.JusticeandthePoliticsofDifference.Princeton:PrincetonUniversityPress.

Zachary,G.P.2000.Aphilosopherinredsneakersgainsinfluenceasaglobalguru.FromEstoniatoNewZealand,nationswithethnicstrifeturntoWillKymlicka,WallStreetJournal:March28.

Zanatta,L.2008.Liberalesycatlicos,populistasymilitares.ElimaginarioorganicistaylaproduccindelenemigointernoenlahistoriadeAmricaLatina.Pp.32045inLosdesafosdelalibertad.Transformacinycrisisdelliberalismo,EuropayAmricaLatina(18901930),eds.M.GarcaSebastianiyF.delReyReguillo.BibliotecaNueva,Madrid.

Zimmermann,E.1994.LosLiberalesReformistas.LaCuestinSocialenlaArgentina18901916.BuenosAires:Sudamericana/UniversidaddeSanAndrs.

Notes:

*


Page 17 of 18


( ).TheauthorwishestothankFabiolaRamrezandAlbertoToledofortheirresearchassistance.

(1).FortheSpanishoriginofthetermLiberalseeLlorens(1967).Liberal,asapoliticallabel,J.G.Merquiorasserts,wasbornintheSpanishCortesof1810,aparliamentthatwasrebellingagainstabsolutism(Merquior1991:2).ClaudioVlizasserts:Itisfairtoaddthatits[thetermLiberal]internationalcareerwasactuallylaunchedbythepoetRobertSouthey,whoin1816,usedtheSpanishformasascornfulepithetaddressedtotheBritishWhigswhomhedescribedasBritishliberalesinanobviousreferencetotheSpanishpoliticalfactionresponsibleforthedisorderlyandultimatelyunsuccessfulreformsinitiatedbytheCortesofCdizin1812(Vliz1994:130).SeealsoBrea(2006).

(2).thethreeauthorsmostfrequentlyencounteredwereMontesquieu,Constant,andBentham.Rousseau,ofgreathelpinjustifyingtheestablishmentofrevolutionarygovernmentsbetween1810and1815,wasdecreasinglyrelevanttoSpanishAmericanconcernsafter1820(Safford1995:367).SeealsoLevene(1956:,179218).

(3).OnConstantseeConstant(1988);Dodge(1980);Holmes(1984);Hofmann(1980);Gauchet(1980).

(4).Anexceptionwasthe1845publicationFacund(1845),bytheArgentineanDomingoSarmiento,thatdweltontherelationbetweenurbanlifeandcivilization.

(5).Thissetofideasiscommonlyreferredtoaspositivism,althoughthereisnoaccepteddefinitionoftheterm.Initsphilosophicsense,Positivismisatheoryofknowledgeinwhichthescientificmethodrepresentsmansonlymeansofknowing.Theelementsofthismethodare,first,anemphasisonobservationandexperiment,withaconsequentrejectionofallaprioriknowledge,andsecondly,asearchforthelawsofphenomena,ortherelationbetweenthem(Hale1986:3823).

(6).SomeofthemdrewinspirationfromJosEnriqueRodsculturalmanifesto:Ariel(1900).

(7).Forexample,theCamisasDoradasinMexico,theMovimientoNacionalSocialistainChile,andtheAccinIntegralistainBrazil.

(8).AcercadelarevolucinenAmrica,llamadoalaclaseobreradelasdosAmricas(1921)andAlosobrerosycampesinosdeAmricadelSur(1923)(Lwy1982:7383).

(9).SeethelonginterviewwithHugoChvezthatHarneckerconducted(Harnecker2002).

(10).Socialintegration,inturn,suggeststheinsertionofanindividualintoacomplexsocietyinwhichhewillbefreetomoveverticallyorhorizontallyaccordingtohistalents(Conniff1982:11).

(11).LatinAmericancountriesreplacingorreformingconstitutionsinrecentyearsinclude:Argentina(1994),Bolivia(1994),Brazil(1988,1994,1997),Chile(1989,1994,1997),Colombia(1991),CostaRica(1996,1997),DominicanRepublic(1996),Ecuador(1996,1998),Mexico(1994,1995,2001),Nicaragua(1987,1995),Panam(1994),Paraguay(1992),Per(1993),Uruguay(1997),andVenezuela(1999).

(12).OnArguedasseeVargasLlosa(1996).OnindigenisminMexicoseeBrading(1988).

(13).Forasample,seeVilloro(1998);Daz-Polanco(2006).

(14).WillKymlicka,forinstancehasdeliberatelysoughttoinfluenceconstitutionmakinginEasternEuropeandelsewhere.Histheoryofmulticulturalcitizenshiphasfoundreceptiveearsinseveralcountries.InalaudatoryarticleintheWallStreetJournalKymlickaisdescribedasaslight,self-effacingphilosophyprofessorwithahabitofwearingredConversesneakersatformaloccasions.AccordingtotheWSJ,forcriticalguidanceEstonianofficialscalledonKymlicka.TheCouncilofEuropehasaskedMrKymlickaforadviceonhowtobetterdefineEuropeancitizenship.GermanysFreeDemocrats,theleadingliberalpoliticalparty,haveaskedthephilosophertohelpdraftacharteronminorityrights.TheCanadiangovernmenthassoughthisviewsonspecialarrangementsforNativeAmericansandFrench-speakingQuebec.MrKymlickaisalsocreditedwithinfluencingdebatesontheminoritystatusofArabsinIsrael,CatalansinSpain,MaorisinNewZealand,andtheHungarianminorityinRomania.SeeKymlickaandOpalski(2001);Zachary(2000).

(15).Inregardtomulticulturalism,BrianBarryasserts:Thedeeperpointisthatthepoliciesadvocatedinitsname

*


Page 18 of 18


arenotliberal.Ifthisisso,itisnaturaltoaskwhyitshouldbethoughtbyanybodythatpoliciesaimedatpromotingdiversityortolerance(astheyaredefinedbycontemporarypoliticalphilosophers)haveanyclaimtocountasimplicationsofliberalism.Themostimportantreasonisthatliberalismhasinrecentyearsbeenequatedbymanypeoplewithculturalrelativism(Barry2001:127).

(16).AsTullyclaims,therecentrepatriationoflimitedself-governingpowersbyindigenouspeoplesfromthestatesthathavetakentheirlands,destroyedtheircustomarypracticesofgovernmentandreducedtheirpopulationstoafractionofpre-contactlevelsperpetuatesapowerfulformofassimilationcalleddomesticationorinternalcolonization(Tully2002:224).

JosAntonioAguilarRiveraProfessorJosAntonioAguilarRivera,CIDE,Mxico

latin_american_political_ideologies.pdf

Documents