Contents List of Figures, Tables, Maps and Boxes ix Preface xi List of Abbreviations xv 1 Introduction 1 Where is Latin America? 1 Dependency and Beyond 4 Politics of Transformation 7 Paths to Modernity 10 2 Settings 13 Physical 13 Demographic 22 Social 27 Economic 32 3 History 37 Beyond Oligarchy 37 Nation-statism 43 Military Authoritarianism 49 Re-democratization 54 4 Political Economy 61 Dependent Development 61 State-led Industrialization 66 The Neo-liberal Model 70 Post-Washington Consensus 76 5 Society 83 Social Structures 83 Social Relations 87 Urbanization 94 Poverty and Welfare 99 6 Politics 107 Consolidation 107 Disenchantment 112 vii PROOF
51
Embed
C:itoolsWMSKCG-MacMilan 7860WorkingFolder9780230354197 … · 2012. 5. 17. · 4 Political Economy 61 Dependent Development 61 State-led Industrialization 66 The Neo-liberal Model
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
May 17, 2012 13:33 MAC/MUNCK Page-vii 9780230354197_01_prexviii
Contents
List of Figures, Tables, Maps and Boxes ix
Preface xi
List of Abbreviations xv
1 Introduction 1Where is Latin America? 1Dependency and Beyond 4Politics of Transformation 7Paths to Modernity 10
May 17, 2012 10:22 MAC/MUNCK Page-1 9780230354197_02_cha01
1
Introduction
Before entering the detailed description of contemporary LatinAmerica’s social, economic, political and cultural development over thepast decades I would like to delve into some broader introductory issues.The first of these is ‘Where is Latin America?’ in which I seek to getbeyond the platitudes of ‘developing region’ type explanations. Situat-ing or characterizing Latin America is, to my mind, a necessary startingpoint for any analysis. The second theme we need to broach is that of‘dependency’ both as supposed conditioning element of development inLatin America and, arguably, as the region’s major contribution to inter-national development theory. Latin America is also, again arguably, quiteoriginal in terms of the political movements for transformation it has gen-erated. Why has Latin America produced Eva Perón, Ché Guevara, HugoChávez, Lula and Evo Morales? What does this tell us about the politicsof transformation? Our fourth and final theme concerns the even broaderquestion of Latin America’s particular path to modernity. If it is not asimply copy (albeit backward) of the West, or just a part of the ThirdWorld (as for example Africa) what is Latin America’s particular road tomodernity? What might this tell us about global development theories?
Where is Latin America?
There was once a simple answer to this question seeking to place orcategorize Latin America. It was a region transiting along the stagesof economic growth, only behind those already fortunate enough toreach ‘take-off’ stage. According to Walt Rostow, who pioneered thisapproach, we start with traditional society, then according to whether thepreconditions for ‘take off’ exist, take off occurs and there is a ‘drive tomaturity’ that eventually results in the age of mass consumption (Rostow1960). While the likes of North America and Australasia were settled bythose coming from a Europe already in transition, the Latin Americastates were not so lucky: ‘they began with a version of a traditional soci-ety – often a merging of traditional Latin Europe and native traditional
1
PROOF
May 17, 2012 10:22 MAC/MUNCK Page-2 9780230354197_02_cha01
2 Contemporary Latin America
cultures – which required fundamental change’ (Rostow 1960:18) beforethey could achieve take off to modernization.
There are serious drawbacks, I believe, to this approach even if intu-itively it might make sense at first glance. First, it takes one particularroute to modernity – the United States – and measures other societiesagainst it. Traditional development theories had taken Britain’s industrialrevolution as the model for all countries. Global development has, in fact,followed many routes and taken different shapes. It cannot be reduced tothe one single path. Second, the idea that all countries are travelling alongthe same path to modernity simply ignores the fact that the global econ-omy is an inter-related system and, to put it bluntly, that the playing fieldwas not level at the start of the race. A structural-historical approach, onthe other hand, would pay due attention to the structures of the globalsystem and its historical configuration.
A very different way of placing Latin America would be in terms of itsmembership of the Third World. The term was coined in the mid-1950sas a sociological category to describe the various post-colonial societiesof Asia, Africa and Latin America. The term achieved a certain politi-cal resonance with the anti-colonial Bandung Conference of 1955 and,even more so in the 1960s with the success of the Cuban Revolutionand its sponsorship of the Tricontinental liberation movement. The pur-pose and drive of the term ‘Third World’ was clearly political as was,back in 1920s, the decision of the Communist International to classifyLatin America as part of the East. The West was advanced and ripe forthe socialist revolution and the East was backwards and ready only fora democratic anti-colonial revolution. In both cases Latin America wassqueezed into a category that did not even begin to do justice to the natureof capitalist development in the region.
The main purpose in considering these terms is as an object lesson inhow not to classify in order to control. As Régis Debray writes ‘ “ThirdWorld” is a lumber-room of a term, a shapeless bag in which we jumbletogether . . . nations, classes, races, civilizations and continents’ (1977:35) in much the same way in which the Ancient Greeks called all non-Greeks ‘barbaros’. It is even inadequate as a tool through which togenerate a common anti-colonial movement because of the incompat-ibles it brought together under one banner. Likewise the CommunistInternationalist’s failure to understand the specificity of Latin Americameant ‘there was too great a temptation to tidy away that awkward con-tinent into the pigeon-hole marked East, along with Africa and Asia’(Debray 1977: 43). Here again the complete failure to understand whatcharacterized Latin America would prove politically costly.
PROOF
May 17, 2012 10:22 MAC/MUNCK Page-3 9780230354197_02_cha01
Introduction 3
It is hard to place Latin America either on an escalator towards a massconsumption society or as part of the Third World or even ‘developingregions’. From the first perspective the definition is based solely on whatLatin America lacks. The second approach lumps Latin America withquite disparate societies with which it has little in common. The thirdapproach as developed later in this introduction – ‘Paths to Modernity’ –will stress the complexity and contradictions of Latin America’s char-acteristics. Over and above the heterogeneity of the continent – whereeven the term ‘Latin’ is dubious – lies its in-between-ness. A regionof preponderantly European immigration, it retains a major indigenouspopulation and a significant proportion of descendants of African slaves.While Western political models are discernible, these are matched bypolitical patterns of radicalization and reaction that might seem not quiteWestern.
The approach underlying this book is that Latin America is a hybridsociety or, put differently, one characterized by mixed temporalities inthe sense that the past is always with us and the future is constantlybeing re-imagined. There is no true ‘essence’ of what Latin America‘really is’. To even begin to think beyond this essentialism we need toimmerse ourselves in the region’s rich literature. Gabriel García Márquezin his classic One Hundred Years of Solitude (Márquez 1970) con-structed the land of Macondo, which has since acted as a byword forLatin American magical realism, a metaphor of the mysteries of LatinAmerica. Macondo – a place where real events such as workers’ strug-gles mix with the mythical, and we magically expand the wings ofwhat is possible. José Joaquín Brunner, a Chilean cultural critic, tellsof how Macondo(ism) has been taken up by those ‘who do not wantto renounce making America a land of promised wonders. The land ofdreams and utopias; the new world out of which an alternative rationalitywill emerge’ (Brunner 2002:15).
Magical realism is not, of course, a global development theory but itcan serve us to re-think the rather wooden or static categories used in bothmainstream and much critical development thinking. There are no sim-ple formulas to deliver development; and to understand the complexityof contemporary Latin America we need to deploy the imagination ratherthan seek to shoehorn Latin America into pre-existing socio-economic orpolitical categories. Another development model is not only possible but,in the current circumstances, probably necessary as well. Latin Americacan be seen thus as a laboratory for social and political experimenta-tion out of which new development practices and political visions mightemerge.
PROOF
May 17, 2012 10:22 MAC/MUNCK Page-4 9780230354197_02_cha01
4 Contemporary Latin America
Dependency and Beyond
The main Latin American riposte to Walt Rostow’s stages of economicgrowth perspective, subtitled significantly enough, A Non-CommunistManifesto, was the dependency theory or approach. It emerged in Chilein the mid-1960s from a group of social scientists around ECLA (Eco-nomic Commission for Latin America) a United Nations think-tank forthe region. Its clearest exposition was Dependency and Development inLatin America by Brazilian sociologist Fernando H. Cardoso and Chileanhistorian Enzo Faletto first published in 1969. Building on the structural-ist perspective of ECLA on Latin America’s role in the global economyit added a strong historical dimension. They did not propose a theory ofdependent capitalism but, rather, sought to describe the various ‘situa-tions of dependency’ that had emerged in the post-colonial era. It is astructural-historical methodology focused on capitalist development inthe periphery and its interaction with social and political processes. Itsemphasis is on internal developments within Latin America and not theinternational context.
Cardoso and Faletto, and many others across disciplines and coun-tries in Latin America, did not conceive of dependency as somethingexternal at all. Indeed, they argued that ‘it is through socio-political struc-tures sustained and moved by social classes and groups with opposedinterests that capitalism . . . is realised in history’ (Cardoso and Faletto1979: xx). The focus is explicitly on the internal struggles within LatinAmerica and not on external dependency as the explanatory variable.Where this approach also departs from the common image of dependencywas in its total acceptance that ‘a real process of dependent develop-ment does exist in some Latin American countries’ (Cardoso and Faletto1979: xxiii). This development is of course uneven, both regionally andsocially, and it is accompanied by much exploitation and inequality, butit is undoubtedly real and it has changed the face of Latin America. Sim-plistic versions of the approach outside Latin America referred ratherto a catastrophic ‘development of underdevelopment’ as the only resultpossible.
Internationally, the dependency approach became associated with therather simplistic approach of André Gunder Frank who argued that ‘thedevelopment of under-development’ was the best that could be hoped for.In a series of popular books he became the conduit for ‘dependency the-ory’ into the North American and European academic milieu. It capturedthe radical mood of the 1970s and acted, rather, as the economic coun-terpart to Régis Debray’s Revolution in the Revolution (Debray 1967)
PROOF
May 17, 2012 10:22 MAC/MUNCK Page-5 9780230354197_02_cha01
Introduction 5
a text, which codified the politics of the Cuban Revolution and whichwas extremely influential. However, it was deeply flawed in its argu-ment that Latin America had always been capitalist, that dependencyalways led to stagnation and that socialist revolution was the only alter-native. As a serious perspective it died out in the 1980s as the rise ofthe East Asian NICs (newly industrialized countries) disproved in prac-tice its pessimistic stagnationist perspective. Politically, the glow of theCuban Revolution has long since faded as a beacon of hope for thoseseeking social and political transformation.
Today, 40 years on from the emergence of Latin America dependencytheory how can it aid our analysis? First of all as a methodology itretains considerable explanatory power. As Cardoso and Faletto put it‘we must analyse the diversity of classes, fractions of classes, groups,organisations, and political and ideological movements which form, ina lively and dynamic way, the history of capitalist expansion in LatinAmerica’ (Cardoso and Faletto 1979: xx). In second place, the depen-dency approach is arguably more relevant in the era of globalization thanit ever was. The internationalization of Latin America’s economies ismuch greater than it was in the 1970s and the imperatives to integratewith the global economy are inescapable. This ‘new dependency’ is cre-ating great dynamism in some sectors and countries while other are beingsidelined and locked into structural dependency. There has been someprogress in relation to combating poverty and even some reduction inincome inequalities but the overall picture is still one of highly unevendevelopment.
Brazil perhaps best exemplifies how Latin America can, and has,engaged with globalization in a way that has benefited national devel-opment. Economic development has oriented towards the global marketbut it has had a strong state-led internal effect as well. Politically, wecould characterize the regimes over the past 20 years as social demo-cratic. That is, they have had a strong redistributionist ethos that has gonesome way towards the mitigation of poverty and hunger. Civil society hasthrived as never before alongside the revival of party political life. Thelikes of the landless peasant movement and the various environmentalcampaigns are, if nothing else, testimony to a vibrant civil society. It isnot just Brazil with its continental dimensions that has achieved a socialdemocratic path within globalization, but also Chile for example.
We should, however, turn to Colombia (and increasingly Mexico) fora vision of a much more perverse engagement with the global systemvia the drugs trade. As Castells puts it, globalization and the criminaleconomy have led to a ‘perverse connection that redefines development
PROOF
May 17, 2012 10:22 MAC/MUNCK Page-6 9780230354197_02_cha01
6 Contemporary Latin America
and dependency in historically unforeseen ways’ (Castells 1998: 201).In Colombia, this new economy builds on a historic legacy of regionalrevolt, the so-called ‘independent republics’ of the 1950s. In Mexico, thecollapse of much of indigenous industry has left the drugs trade as onemajor lucrative export trade. Whatever beneficial development benefitsthat might accrue – for example, the regeneration of Bogotá – these areprobably nullified by the death and destruction they leave in their wake.Its impact on state capabilities and democratic politics generally is, ofcourse, totally detrimental.
The issue of drugs and crime in Latin America – as elsewhere – can-not however be dealt with in isolation. Too often it is sensationalized inmedia coverage, though this is not to deny that its effects are horrific.Nor should we minimize the impact of quite unprecedented levels ofviolence on people and communities. We do, however, need to look atthe structural roots of the drugs trade. Set in the context of the rise ofglobalization in the 1990s, it seems clear, as Manuel Castells puts it, that‘the flexible construction of these criminal activities in international net-works constitutes an essential feature of the new global economy, and ofthe social/political dynamics of the Information Age’ (1998: 167). It isthe nature of the internationalized economy and the rising demand fordrugs in the affluent North that has created the illegal drugs industry inLatin America today.
Among Latin American researchers an analytical perspective hasemerged in recent years as a counter to neo-liberalism. This newapproach brings up to date the structuralist approach of the 1960s’Economic Commission for Latin America (ECLA) to advance a ‘neo-structuralism’ fit for the globalization era. It argues that the global systemand centre-periphery relations in particular are characterized by funda-mental asymmetries. While it accepts that liberalization of internationaltrade was inevitable, it cautions against further liberalization withoutadequate protective measures. It also reads very differently the success ofthe East Asian NICs seen by neo-liberalism as simple proof that liberal-ization is good for development. The main lesson that neo-structuraliststake from this experience ‘is the need to selectively integrate intothe world economy and create competitive advantages through well-designed and flexible industrial policies’ (Gwynne and Kay 2004: 263).In other words, the state should play a key role in development.
Where the Latin American approach to development differs fromestablished wisdom is precisely in its focus on the state and, indeed, civilsociety. In this sense, it may provide pointers in the current global con-versations to find a way out of the impasse created by the neo-liberal
PROOF
May 17, 2012 10:22 MAC/MUNCK Page-7 9780230354197_02_cha01
Introduction 7
unregulated market model which resulted in the 2008/09 recession. Cer-tainly no one now – and very few it must be said even in the 1960s –advocates delinking from the world economy. Foreign investment and themultinationals are not seen as contrary to the interests of development.It is just that the state needs to govern the market through strong regu-latory institutions if development (and not just private enrichment) is tooccur. Furthermore, against the dominant emphasis on unregulated mar-kets that undermine social cohesion, the Latin American school stressesthe need for development with equity. To deliver on the challenge ofpoverty and inequality, a development strategy needs to place at its corethe question of citizenship and the role of a vigorous and free civil societyin building it and sustaining it.
The new dependency created by globalization is not, of course, auniform condition. At one end stands Brazil – a global player devel-oping a powerful economic base, a strong internal market and enjoyingconsiderable geo-strategic power. At the other end of the spectrum liethe countries of Central America along with Paraguay and Uruguay forexample, with scant prospects for autonomous or even semi-autonomousgrowth paths. In between we can probably place some major countriessuch as Mexico and Colombia, which have achieved significant growthbut one based on clear dependency on the United States and a perverseintegration into the international market via the illegal drugs trade. Giventhis scenario it seems unlikely that Brazil might act as regional powerintegrating Latin (or even South) America as a coherent block. TheVenezuela of Chávez seeks to play that role but it is almost totally depen-dent on oil revenue and it has attracted only patchy and quite conditionalsupport across the region.
Politics of Transformation
The economic prospects of any region depend, of course, on politics.Has the predominance of left-of-centre governments over the past decademade a difference in terms of economic policies? For their detractors theleft-of-centre governments simply continued the neo-liberal policies oftheir predecessors. More careful analysis shows a significant reduction ofpoverty (if not inequality) in countries such as Brazil, Mexico, Venezuelaand Chile where different types of governments instituted pro-poor mea-sures. That goes to show that politics matter and that development is notdetermined by the structural position of a given region in the global econ-omy. Whatever our verdict on the impact of the new left governments
PROOF
May 17, 2012 10:22 MAC/MUNCK Page-8 9780230354197_02_cha01
8 Contemporary Latin America
in Latin America is, we can say that they have helped open up globaldebates on a post-neo-liberal development strategy.
As a world region Latin America has had more than its share ofdramatic political transformations. Indeed, the politics of transforma-tion could be said to be a defining characteristic of the region. Theindependence movements of the early nineteenth century were precur-sors of many others across the world. What was noticeable was thecontinental aspiration of some of its main leaders (San Martín, SimónBolivar, etc) and the decisiveness of the engagement with Spain asimperial power. After three full centuries of colonial rule, the localcriollo intellectuals and military leaders sought to invent the SouthAmerican republics in the contact of a broader American federation.It is this continental aspiration for social transformation that is beingrevived by today’s advocates of Boliviarianism as a twenty-first centurysocialism.
What is perhaps remarkable is how difficult Latin American national-ism has been to categorize from a Western analytical perspective. Mostof the Western theorists of nationalism have tended to ignore LatinAmerica as it did not fit in with their schemas. The formation of thenation-state was not closely linked to racial identification insofar as mes-tizaje (racial mixing) was the norm. While there have been authoritarianand conservative versions of nationalism, much more common from theMexican revolution of 1910 onwards has been the developmentalist, anti-imperialist version. The idea of nation as a political community doesnot even translate easily into Spanish or Portuguese: nación refers todifferent peoples, whereas patria signifies something more like today’snation-state. Nor is nationalism imbricated with secularization as inWestern Europe, rather the role of religion was crucial in shaping LatinAmerican individualism.
Karl Marx notoriously misunderstood Simón Bolivar completely andsaw in him just a pale reflection of Napoleon III (one of his pet hates) andcompletely failed to appreciate his dynamic role in Latin America’s colo-nial revolution. Then in the twentieth century both Marxist and liberalsmanaged to conflate the rise of Perón in Argentina in 1945 with Europeanfascism. An army colonel who forged an alliance with the labour unionsand created a strong popular nationalist movement, Perón was consis-tently categorized as a fascist because of certain Mussolini-like trappingsof his regime. That he was opposed to the remnants of British eco-nomic domination in Argentina seemed enough to put him in the Nazicamp. To this day Northern interpretations of Perón and Peronism(see Brennan 1998) are tainted by this bizarre and ahistorical failure
PROOF
May 17, 2012 10:22 MAC/MUNCK Page-9 9780230354197_02_cha01
Introduction 9
to engage with the reality and complexity of political transformation inLatin America.
Latin American nationalism has proven itself resistant to externalunderstanding but it has, nevertheless, generated key analytical conceptssuch as that of ‘populism’. After the Russian Populists of the early 1800sit is Latin American populisms that have generated most attention. Perónin Argentina and Vargas in Brazil in the 1950s are the archetypes, buttoday Chávez in Venezuela is seen as the main ‘populist’. What does thismean? Often it implies a charismatic leadership style and social redis-tribution in terms of economic policies. However, rather than use it inpejorative terms we would be better studying it as a complex form ofpolitical identification beyond social class or other traditional markers.Certainly populism in practice has served to mobilize ‘the people’ in pur-suit of social and political transformation in dynamic and understudiedprocesses.
Since the 1960s, Latin America has not ceased to provide the worldwith significant movements and discourses of transformation and libera-tion. The political trajectory of Ernesto ‘Ché’ Guevara, from Argentina,then a Cuban global figure, is still pored over and is the subject of variousreadings. Of course, myth and political reality have blurred boundaries insuch a situation but Cuba remains a contested terrain for political com-mentators and for big power politics as well. Guevara’s internationalistpolitics and voluntarist conception of the ‘New Man’ continues to attractattention and not only in Latin America. These phenomena have grippedthe political imagination of people over the years and across countries.They still matter for an understanding of the prospects and the obstaclesfor social transformation in the twenty-first century.
The Zapatistas in Mexico have been hailed as the first guerrillas ofthe information age and there is an image of Subcomandante Marcossending out Internet messages from the jungle in Lacandón. A vast lit-erature commenting on and generalizing this experience has developedsince their emergence in the mid 1990s. Whatever the quality or rele-vance of this output, it has certainly put Zapatismo on the global map ofsocial transformation theory and practice. An even broader impact hasbeen caused by the World Social Forum, an initiative that began in fromthe Brazilian left-led city of Porte Alegre. In the contestation of neo-liberal globalization no movement compares with the Forum in terms ofits scope, ambitions and achievements in terms of generating widespreadacceptance that ‘another world is possible’. More recently, the Chileanstudent revolt of 2010–11 has brought the youth to the fore again in amobilization with considerable resonance with the 1960s. While totally
PROOF
May 17, 2012 10:22 MAC/MUNCK Page-10 9780230354197_02_cha01
10 Contemporary Latin America
networked and contemporary in its mode of mobilization, this protesthas also produced a leader, Comandante Camila who is a member ofthe orthodox Communist Party and has a portrait of Karl Marx in heroffice. Generating a vision for social, political and cultural transforma-tion has been a distinct Latin American contribution to the global politicsof transformation.
It is certainly significant that it is under left-of-centre governmentsthat countries such as Argentina, Brazil and Chile, but also the openlyradicalized regime in Venezuela, have achieved some (though not major)reduction in poverty and inequality levels over the past decade. Thishas not been achieved through profligate populist measures as the crit-ics have alleged, but rather through concerted social policies runningalongside fairly mainstream pro-market growth strategies. The South-ern Cone countries have also made progress in terms of settling accountswith the military dictatorships of the 1980s with several recent landmarklegal cases. The challenge will be to continue along the path of sustainedeconomic growth in a way that will not reproduce dependency, but todeepen democracy so that dictatorship will never again become a formof political rule in Latin America.
Paths to Modernity
While modernization theory (Walt Rostow) offers a poor guide to thedevelopment of Latin America, this is indeed a region with a strong drivetowards modernity. García Canclini has somewhat obliquely summed upthe main Latin American contradiction as ‘we have an exuberant mod-ernism and a deficient modernization’ (García Canclini, 2002: 41). Col-onization occurred under the aegis of the Iberian Counter-Reformationand other anti-modern movements. Since independence there have beenwaves of modernization led first by a progressive oligarchy, then the ris-ing middles classes and immigrants, even by military dictatorships (oftenmodernizing in intent) and now by left wing governments who argue thatmodernity and democratization must go hand in hand.
There is a common view that the obstacles to modernization lie deepin the Latin American psyche. Thus, for example, Claudio Véliz drawsan interesting analogy between the hedgehog and fox as descriptors(shown in Table 1.1) of Latin American and North American identitycharacteristics (Véliz 1994).
The Spanish and Portuguese conquests are seen as bearers of thehedgehog characteristics along with the Spanish/Portuguese languages
PROOF
May 17, 2012 10:22 MAC/MUNCK Page-11 9780230354197_02_cha01
Introduction 11
Table 1.1 Hedgehog and fox descriptions
Hedgehog (Latin America) Fox (North America)
Resistance to change MobilitySymmetry AsymmetryUnit DiversityCentralism DecentralisationOrganic InorganicTradition Change
and Catholicism. Diversity and discontinuity were shunned with a fearof the unexpected militating against modernization. Thus, according toVéliz, there is a deep cultural resistance in Latin America towards all thecharacteristics that are necessary for development.
We could argue that this type of simple binary opposition between thehedgehog and fox type of culture is a form of essentialism in the sensethat a given group is seen to display certain innate characteristics thatrepresent their essential being. As an approach it does not really allowfor diversity and hybridity, it does not encompass contradictions and itis rather too symmetrical and neat. It is also somewhat uncritical of theUS English-speaking fox that Véliz sees as now finally overcoming thecultural deficit of Latin America through an influx of cheap and accessi-ble consumer goods: ‘the lofty dome of the Spanish cultural revolutionhas in the end proved defenceless against blue jeans, computer graphics,jogging shoes and electric toasters’ (Véliz 1994: 219). This approach,based on the power of consumer goods, misses out the complexity ofeconomic development and social change, social classes, political par-ties, governments and business interests that have all interacted withinLatin America to promote and drive change.
Another approach to modernity is to value positively what is particularto Latin America. One route is to (re)discover the continent’s indige-nous cultural roots, a form of indigenismo. In the 1990s, this approachwas promoted by many social and cultural movements. From this per-spective, the whole development effort has been misguided in the senseof introducing alien technologies. The early Andean communities couldthus serve as an inspiration for a new non-Western instrumental formof reason. This different type of rationality would, supposedly, inspire anew era of emancipation and break with dependency.
While no one can deny the political importance of today’s neo-indigenismo as a political factor, most noticeably in Bolivia and Ecuador,
PROOF
May 17, 2012 10:22 MAC/MUNCK Page-12 9780230354197_02_cha01
12 Contemporary Latin America
it is, in a sense, another form of essentialism, this time valuing posi-tively all that is not Western consumerism and competitive individualism.In reality, Latin America has always seen a mixture of cultural influ-ences, Western and non-Western. Against all forms of essentialism, weshould perhaps stress mixture and hybridity and even seek to understandhow Latin America can be understood as living in different temporali-ties. García Canclini has captured this complex reality well when he saysthat ‘we do not arrive at one modernity, but at several unequal and com-bined processes of modernization’ (1995: 103). There is no one path tomodernity – there are many and Latin America’s is very much its own –but, on the other hand, we cannot go back to a mythical pre-modern era.
This text will neither view Latin America in terms of what it lacksto attain modernity, as a case of exceptionalism, in regards to globaldevelopment models, nor as a mystery so obscure at to defy analysis.As a world region, Latin America is undoubtedly Western – in terms ofreligion, culture and political patterns – albeit perhaps the Far West asFrench political scientist Alain Rouquié (1998) once called it. It is alsoa post-colonial society and that makes it somewhat different from theregions of European settlement in North America and Australia. It hasa strong non-Western component in its indigenous populations and alsodescendants of African slaves. It was part of the New World that Europeexpanded into and it is now part of the rise of the non-Western eco-nomic resurgence led by China, India and Brazil. What follows is aLatin American perspective on a region characterized by contradictions,hybridity but, above all, a great dynamism.
In contemporary Latin America, many countries are now marking 200years of independence achieved across the region between 1810 and1825. The world after the global recession of 2008/09 is a very differentplace from what is was even a decade ago and we cannot predict what that200th anniversary will mean in terms of economic, political and culturalindependence. National economic independence in the traditional senseis no longer possible in a world with an integrated global market. On theother hand, the hegemony of the market has been severely shaken at leastsince 2008/09. Alternative models of development are now being activelyexplored and the one true path through free market policies no longerrules supreme. That many countries in Latin America – most notablyBrazil – recovered quite quickly from the 2008/09 recession indicatesthat there is at least some degree of independence emerging. Politically,not to mention culturally, there is something positive afoot.
PROOF
May 17, 2012 14:41 MAC/MUNCK Page-273 9780230354197_15_ind01
Index
Notes: bold = extended discussion or term highlighted in text; B = box, f = figure,m = map, n = note, t = table.
124Andermann, J. 253Anderson, P. 247Angell, A. 110Angola 23, 202banomie 96‘another world is possible’ (slogan) 9, 143Antarctic question 212–13anti-colonial revolution
versus ‘socialist revolution’ 2anti-imperialism 45b, 179
see also cultural imperialismanti-modernism 10, 244Antonin, A. 233Apartheid 209b, 200, 212Aprismo (Peru) 43Araucanians 244
273
PROOF
May 17, 2012 14:41 MAC/MUNCK Page-274 9780230354197_15_ind01
‘barbarism’ 40, 243barbaros 2Barton, J. 212–13, 250Bartra, R. 250‘base communities’ 183basic needs 131basismo (NGO grassroots orientation)
174Batista, F. 201Bay of Pigs 201Beagle Channel Islands 211, 212Bebbington, A. 171, 176, 252Beck, U. 225beef 40, 207Beijing Conference on Women (1995)
220‘Belindia’ (Belgium and India) 225Belize 17bBelo Horizonte 22b, 28, 94tBenoit, H. 164bBergquist, C. 250Bethel, L. 249BG Group Plc 122b‘blame the victim’ 157Blanco, H. 144Boal, A. 194bBogotá 6, 94t, 201Bogotá: pan-American conference (1948)
201bolero 193Bolivar, S. 8, 39b, 39, 118, 120–1b, 145b
indigenous viewpoint 145blegacy 39b‘Liberator’ 38, 39b‘misunderstood by Marx’ 8‘one-nation’ dream 38, 39bpolitical thought 39bworld-wide parliament proposal 121b
158t, 158population increase (1950–2020) 26tpresidential election (2005) 120–1profile 18bresistance to Brazil 208‘ungovernability’ 237Upper Peru renamed thus (1824) 39burban capitalist class 86
Bolivian Revolution (1952) 247Bolsa Família (Family Fund, Brazil) 113Bonaparte, N. 38
see also Napoleon IIIbonded labour 23boom and bust 218bBooth, J. A. 250, 252border issues 199, 211–12, 229b, 229Borges, J. L. 189b, 253bossa nova 194b‘bourgeois hegemony’ 196Brasilia 94tBrazil xiii, xiv, 4, 10, 12–13, 20, 24, 34t,
35beyond dependency 223beyond oligarchy 42black social movement 149break with old trade unionism 141carbon dioxide emissions 29t, 30cinema 193–4‘consensual alliance-building’ 209bconstitution 142, 160bcountry profile 22b
PROOF
May 17, 2012 14:41 MAC/MUNCK Page-276 9780230354197_15_ind01
276 Index
Brazil – continued‘coup within coup’ (1968) 49democratic disenchantment 113–15,
117‘difference’ 207drug flows 232melection (1989) 159elections 113–15‘emerging economy’ status 32engagement with globalization 5environmental movement 152–3exports to Argentina 207fixed capital formation (government
participation) 68football 196foreign policy 209b‘global player’ 7, 207–8‘great leap forward’ (1956–60) 68HDI (2010) 29thousehold income distribution (2009)
31tincome distribution ‘most unequal’
101–2income inequality 30, 31tindustrial sector 206industrial work force (1950–80) 83industrialization 46, 66inequality-reduction 100integration into world system 225‘key country’ 238–9labour movements 139–41land question (statement of Catholic
Church, 1980) 185blandless movement 143blife expectancy (regional
race 91b, 92recovery from global recession (2008–9)
207re-democratization (1985–) 55–6regional (supra-national) role 209bregional economic aspirations 226regional inequality 22brepublic (1889–) 40, 41rise as global economic player 61rural organization 142–3‘semi-connected’ (internet usage)
32‘semi-industrialized’ (late 1960s) 67slaves 23social differentiation 38social movements 183–4social record ‘disastrous’ 113–14standard of administration 166state reform (1990s) 169–70state role 44–5stock market ‘seventh largest in world’
207–8street children (unpunished killing)
163‘territorial fragility’ 238torture 164trade disputes with USA 203trading partner 20bwar in favelas 164bwelfare policy (state-driven) 105women 148see also BRIC
Brazil: Finance Ministry 113Brazilian Shield or Plateau 19bBrazilianization (Beck) 225, 233Brennan, J. 8Bresser-Pereira, C. L. 170, 175, 252BRIC 207, 221, 226Britain see United KingdomBrodeur, J-P. 161Brooksbank-Jones, A. 253Brunner, J. J. 3Buchi, H. 169Buena Vista Social Club 196Buendía family (García Márquez, 1967)
Civilization or Barbarism? (Sarmiento,1845) 177, 178b, 243
clash of civilizations (Huntington)242–3
clientelism 174, 175, 176climate 15, 16, 19b, 218b, 253Clinton, W. J. 203, 206Co-Madres (El Salvador) 150Coalition for Change (Chile) 109
coastal areas (costa) 15, 21, 144versus interior highlands 34
Cobos, A. M. 251coca/cocaine 64b, 120–1, 123b, 214b,
229, 232b, 232mcocalero movement 120, 122–3bcoffee 18–19b, 22b, 46, 63–4, 207Cohen, M. 249Cold War 200–1, 202b, 217, 220College of Liberal Arts 185nCollier, S. 249Collor de Mello, F. 55, 127, 159, 160bColombia xiii, xiv, 7, 15, 23, 39b, 91, 94,
‘evil of all evils’ (Fox) 111corruption trials 127Cortázar, J. 188
case-study 189bworks 189b
Costa Rica 17b, 21, 34t, 42, 136, 166,221, 237
carbon dioxide emissions 29t, 30exceptionalism 48HDI (2010) 29thousehold income distribution (2009)
31tincome distribution 101infant mortality rates 28, 29tlife expectancy 28, 29tliteracy 28, 29t‘oldest polyarchy’ in LA 156party-system institutionalization index
158t, 158population increase (1950–2020) 26tpresidentialism 156public employment versus total
employment (1954–80) 167f
PROOF
May 17, 2012 14:41 MAC/MUNCK Page-281 9780230354197_15_ind01
Index 281
‘truly immigrant country’ 25welfare model (social-democratic)
104–5women (uneven representation)
159–60‘Country or Death’ (Cuban slogan) 136Craske, N. 252Craven, D. 253crear espacio 81bcrime/criminals 22b, 79, 161–2, 163–4,
164b, 229b, 231see also organized crime
crimes against humanity 151criollos 8, 24–5, 38, 40, 192Cruz, C. 196Cuba 24, 44, 67, 94, 116, 134, 202b, 216,
219, 240b, 250‘capitalist work methods’ 48collective leadership 124‘contested terrain’ 9economic and political phases (1959–)
ability to ‘deliver’ (scepticism) 176definitions 57enrichment by social movements 153impediments to full implementation
176literature 249, 251–2nature 157–61opponents 51b, 52‘process rather than event’ 238Przeworski’s definition 57quality 92–3, 102, 129, 130quality ‘still a problem’ 59relationship with development 100US model 239women’s activism 90see also post-democracy
globalization era 85desarollismo (developmentalism) 47desarollista state 66, 67, 68, 70, 79descamisadas 88bdesencanto (disenchantment) 113desertification 152desgaste (wear and tear) 238developed countries 27, 30
‘advanced industrial societies’32, 61
‘industrialized countries’ 227‘North’ 84, 199see also OECD
developing countries 3, 46, 62, 72‘South’ 171ways to participate in globalization
77–8development xi–xii, xiv, 43, 99, 148,
181, 211, 213, 242, 246‘alternative model’ 152‘associated-dependent’ model 68‘global’ versus ‘national’ 235‘key determinant’ of success 68LA agenda 218bliterature 33market-based strategies 176meaning in era of globalization 236people-centred 236post-neo-liberal strategy 8relationship with democracy 100single path for all versus
structural-historical approach2, 4
social and economic strategy 217uneven 225, 228, 233, 244see also economic development
PROOF
May 17, 2012 14:41 MAC/MUNCK Page-283 9780230354197_15_ind01
Index 283
‘development gap’ 32development models 12, 67b, 74bdevelopment paths 246development theory 1, 2, 3‘development of under-development’ 4,
41, 62developmental state 6, 35, 36, 166developmentalism 8, 66Di Tella 25dictablanda (soft dictatorship) 53Dieguez, M. 217‘difference’ 129, 181digital divide 235Diretas Já campaign (1984) 114bdirigisme 166‘disappeared’ (missing persons) 50, 51b,
90, 150, 162divide-and-rule tactics 37–8, 210division of labour 23
199, 206–7, 212, 218b, 219–20new social movements 133, 146, 149,
151–3environmental degradation 17–21,
145bequality 129, 145b, 218b
PROOF
May 17, 2012 14:41 MAC/MUNCK Page-285 9780230354197_15_ind01
Index 285
Escobar, A. 253essentialism 11–12, 243estado de derecho see rule of lawethics 54, 55, 150, 170ethnic groups 89, 195ethnicity 22, 40, 87, 90–2, 93, 101, 129,
116, 170Fortaleza 94t‘forward linkages’ (economic) 63Foweraker, J. 253Fox, V. 53, 58, 111–12, 113
PROOF
May 17, 2012 14:41 MAC/MUNCK Page-286 9780230354197_15_ind01
286 Index
France 122b, 199Franco, F. 50, 52, 113Franco, I. 55Franco, J. 190Frank, A. G. 4, 62free trade 20b, 205–6, 208, 209b, 221,
253free-market mechanisms xii, xiv, 70, 86,
99, 103, 207, 210, 224failings (social and institutional) 78‘proven catastrophic social impact’ 82see also neo-liberalism
free-riding 127free-trade agreements 121Free-Trade Area of Americas (FTAA)
206, 209b, 226failure 210
freedompolitical versus economic 44
freedom of expression and association156
freedom of press 53, 107freedom of religion 123bFrei, E. Jr. 54, 109Freire, P. 143b, 253Freitlowitz, M. 51bFrente Amplio coalition 116Freyre, G. 90, 92‘Friends of Fox’ 112Fuentes, C. 98n, 98, 99, 188–90, 244Fujimori, A. K. 57–8, 97, 156, 169, 238,
250Fukuyama, F. 224, 247futures xiii–xiv, 223–47
after democracy 223, 236–42after dependency 223, 227–32after modernity 223, 242–6after neo-liberalism 223, 233–6conclusion 246–7drug flows 232b, 232mglobal setting 223, 224–7migration flows 228–9b, 230mopen-ended vision 223to be Latin American 245bZapatistas 240–1b
García Canclini, N. 10, 12, 239, 245b,246, 253
García Márquez, G. 3, 177, 179, 188,189b, 190–1, 243
Garretón, M. A. 67n, 74n, 250, 252gauchos 177, 178b, 179, 192, 196
GDP 30, 33, 34t, 66, 214bAndean countries 19bArgentina 20bBrazil 22bChile 21bLatin America 32Mexico 16bUruguay 21bsee also income per capita
Brazilian engagement 5‘creates new dualism’ 234–5‘creative response’ required 245bdefinition 35economic differentiation of LA 233foreign takeover of key industries 76‘from below’ 171‘internationalization of finance and
May 17, 2012 14:41 MAC/MUNCK Page-287 9780230354197_15_ind01
Index 287
ways to participate (developingeconomies) 77–8
see also global settingGlobo (media conglomerate) 195‘glocal’ concept 197Gogna, M. 151Goldman Sachs 207Goldstein, D. 249good governance 102, 176, 214, 237Gott, R. 118, 125, 250Goulart, J. 49governance xiii, 57, 130, 155–76,
235bureaucracy and administration 155,
165–71economic technocrats 168belectoral and party systems
155–61media and politics 160bNGOs (filling the gap) 155,
171–6NGOs and politics 174brule of law 155, 161–5war in favelas 164b
‘governing the market’ (Wade) 35governments 35, 36, 45, 80, 82,
see also insurgencyGuevara, E. 1, 9, 119, 133, 191Guevarism 136, 180Guiana Highlands 19bGutiérrez de Piñeres, S. A. 214bGuzzetti, Rear-Admiral C. A. 51bGwynne, R. 250
habeas corpus 163Habel, J. 250Haggard, S. 251Haiti 112, 156, 203, 232b, 233Hall, S. 192Halperín Donghi, T. 249Harvey, N. 250Havana/La Habana 94t, 188health 56b, 70, 79, 109, 122–3b, 140–1
see also structural-historical perspectivehistory-as-progress 66HIV-AIDS 229Hochschild family (Bolivia) 25Holden, R. 202nHollander, N. C. 89nHolmes, J. 214homelessness 163Honduras 17b, 34t, 67, 81b, 137, 211,
221drug flows 232mHDI (2010) 29thousehold income distribution (2007)
31tinfant mortality rates 28, 29tpopulation density 26t, 27population increase (1950–2020) 26tUNDP Electoral Democracy Index
107Hopscotch (Cortázar, 1963) 188,
189bHouse of Deputies (Argentina) 88bhouseholds 85, 102, 253
intellectuals 50, 171intendentes (local governors) 38Inter-American Court of Human Rights
163Inter-American Development Bank
(IDB) 19b, 27, 30, 72–3, 79, 99,102, 177
data source 255Inter-American Dialogue 221inter-American system 201, 217inter-disciplinary approach 250, 252inter-war era 216‘internal’ conditions of dependency
202bcolonialism to globalism 199–204‘conditioning situation for internal
developments’ 199drugs: economics and politics 214bLA agenda 218bLA in world today 199,
216–21regional integration [supra-national]
199, 204–11security issues 199, 211–16see also context
international development 171, 173
PROOF
May 17, 2012 14:41 MAC/MUNCK Page-290 9780230354197_15_ind01
290 Index
international economic order 82, 219international financial institutions 174binternational law 121binternational relations 219international system 257internet 9, 137, 220, 244, 254–5internet usage 30–2investment 44, 46–7, 65, 103
national versus foreign capital(synergies) 227
see also FDIinvestors 168, 236
inward-oriented development (ECLAmodel) 78
Iraq 213, 221, 247Islam 242Italy 25, 137
Jackson, J. 253Jaggi, M. 194nJalisco NGO experience (1990s) 174–5b‘Jamaica Letter’ (Bolívar) 39bJapan 33t, 204, 220jazz 189bJeria Gómez, Á. 108bJesuit order 38Jesus Christ 186Jews 24Johnson, L. B. 204journalists 163journals 254Joyce, J. 188judges/judiciary 156, 163Julião, F. 142‘just society’ and ‘new man’ 183
Kampuchea 202bKane, L. 253Kaufman, R. 251Kay, C. 146, 250Keynesian policies 66killings/murder 23, 163, 164b, 165,
185b, 214b, 229see also state terror
Kinder, Küche, Kirche ideology 90King, D. 121King, J. 253kinship 84, 92Kirchner, C. F. de 111, 159Kirchner, N. 111Kissinger, H. A. 201, 202bKlak, T. 227Kline, H. 251Knight, A. 250
Knippers Black, J. 249Korzeniewicz, R. 77, 234, 253Kubitschek period (Brazil, 1956–60) 68
La Convención area (Peru) 144‘La Violencia’ era (Colombia, 1948–58)
101‘post-utopian’ era 125power asymmetry (versus USA)
203–4‘process rather than place’ 246–7prospects for democracy 58–9re-democratization 37, 54–9‘region of contradictions’ xirelations with Europe and Japan 203–4relations with USA 203–4, 216–21,
252revolutionary history 247search for identity (Schelling) 182settings xi–xii, 13–36, 155, 233‘simplistic notions of external
175, 180, 231, 235legitimation 38, 42Lehman, D. 171, 176, 183, 253Leo XIII 143bLevine, D. 250
liberal democracy 61, 157liberalism (C19) 41liberals 8‘liberation’ versus ‘dependency’
180–1liberation theology/Theology of Liberation
150, 177, 183–5, 253case-study 184–5b
‘Liberator’ 38, 39bLievesley, G. 148, 159, 250, 252life chances 93life expectancy 28, 29t, 30, 103light industry 67
see also manufacturingLima 94, 94t, 98, 190Linz, J. 252literacy 28–30literary boom 3, 177, 179, 187–92, 243,
253see also Latin America: recommended
readingliterary studies 250living standards 173
rural-urban gap 96local government 116, 174London 135b, 254López, A. 195López Obrador, A. M. 112, 118López-Calva, L. 99–100‘lost decade’ (1980s) 30, 33, 105Lustig, N. 99–100
machinery 20b, 22b, 63, 68machismo 24, 87–8, 89, 148machismo-marianismo model
Marshall, T. H. 127Martí, J. 44, 45bMartin Fierro (Hernandez, 1872) 179Martin, D. 186, 253Martin, G. 188, 191, 253Martin, J. de 38–9Martín-Barbero, J. 193Marx, K. H. 8, 10, 140, 196
31tidentity 188–90industrialization 46, 66industry 33, 34tinequality reduction 100‘key country’ 238–9killing of political opponents 163labour movements 139, 140bliterature 250loss of territory to USA 200, 204massacre of students (1968) 53NAFTA 205–6
PROOF
May 17, 2012 14:41 MAC/MUNCK Page-294 9780230354197_15_ind01
‘transnational corporations’ 179multipolarity 220, 226Munck, G. 100, 127–8Munck, R. ii, iii, 135b, 141, 253‘municipal socialism’ 79music 149, 192–3, 196, 244music and politics (case study) 194bMussolini, B. 8, 134
205–6, 209b, 211, 213, 239Chilean aspiration to join 206, 208–9combined GDP 205effective from 1 January 1995 206‘neo-liberal high tide’ 206‘side agreements’ 206
Napoleon III (France) 8
narcotráfico 214bsee also drugs
Nasser, G. A. 219‘nation’ (concept) 91nation-building 68, 181nation-state 8, 35, 40, 41, 93, 123b, 130,
146–7, 211, 225, 231, 233‘main motor of development’ (post-war
period) 44National Affirmative Action Programme
(Brazil, 2002–) 129national development 82, 236, 245bNational Guard (Nicaragua) 137national identity xi, 147, 193, 196, 239national income distribution 135bnational interest 35, 215national mythology 40National Plan for Agrarian Reform
agrarian 42and beyond 37–43Central America 47decline 43Guatemala 47–8progressive 10
Oliveira, O. D. 85, 95nollas populares (communal pots) 148Olympic Games (Mexico, 1968) 53, 188One Hundred Years of Solitude (García
Márquez, 1967) 3, 190–1Onganía, J. C. 49–50OPEC 134‘open’ regionalism 205, 210–11opera houses 20–1bOperation Just Cause (1989) 203‘opiate of masses’ (Marx) 187, 196opinion polls 160b, 161Oppenheim, L. 250oppression 148, 182, 187
see also repressionoptimism 27, 41, 62, 99–100, 119, 191,
196‘option for poor’ (Catholicism) 182–3Ordem e Progresso (motto) 41, 179Organizacôes Globo 160bOrganization of American States
(OAS/OEA, 1948/1951–) 199, 217,219
‘served as US colonial department’201
organized crime 58, 164b, 214bsee also transnational crime
Orinoco river system 13Ortega, D. 118, 159
Ortega brothers (Nicaragua) 136Os Sertôes (da Cunha, 1902) 178–9‘otherness’ 179, 181, 242‘our struggle is bigger than a house’
(slogan) 97outward orientation 78, 137overcrowding 98b, 98, 240Oxhorn, P. 251
Pachamama 145bPacific Ocean 16‘pact of domination’ 46–7Pakistan 213Palacios, M. 250pampas 19b, 177, 179Panama 15, 17b, 24, 26t, 29t, 31t, 33t,
peso (Argentina) 76, 80, 214Petras, J. 86n, 114b, 173
PROOF
May 17, 2012 14:41 MAC/MUNCK Page-299 9780230354197_15_ind01
Index 299
Petrobras 122bPetry, W. 253Philip, G. 249physical setting 13–22Pinheiro, D. 163Pinochet dictatorship 21b, 201
Catholic Church ‘most solid opponent’183
‘Declaration of Principles’ (1974) 52Pinochet, General 36, 49, 50, 54–5, 70,
103, 104b, 138, 167, 181arrest in London (1998) 151, 165cession of power (1989) 108–9death (2006) 108bgender relations (authoritarian view)
90neo-liberal model 70–1presidentialism 156stripped of immunity (2000) 151
‘Pinochetismo without Pinochet’ 52piqueteros 111plata o plomo 229pluralism 111, 180poblaciones (shanty-towns) 138pobladores 97Poe, E. A. 189bpolicing 162–3, 164
May 17, 2012 14:41 MAC/MUNCK Page-300 9780230354197_15_ind01
300 Index
politics – continuedliterature 249, 250, 251–2, 253media and 160bmusic and 194bnarcotics 214bNGOs and 174–5bopposed per se by Pinochet 167other references 12, 43, 67b, 74b, 152,
239, 240bpopular involvement (new era) 238‘post-utopian, post-millenarian era’
‘rising tide raises all ships’ 36, 99risk 15, 67b, 74b, 231, 233risk-index studies 236River Plate 13, 14m, 19bRivera, D. 193roads 23, 41, 68, 97Roberts, B. 85, 95nRoberts, B. R. 253Rock, D. 250Rodo, J. 179Roett, R. 250Romero, Archbishop O. 150, 185,
204rondas campesinas (peasant circles)
144Rostow, W. 1, 4, 10rouba mas faz (they steal but they do
things) 115Rouquié, A. 12Rousseff, D. 115, 156, 159, 204Rowe, W. 253Rúa, F. de la 77‘rule by obeying’ 241brule of law 128, 130, 155, 161–5
structural features 163, 165rules of game 35, 115, 220rural areas 34, 62, 81b, 113, 159, 143b,
Sader, E. 113–14Sage, C. 213Saint Jean, I. 51bSáinz, P. 75Salman, T. 117salsa 196Salvador (Brazil) 94tsamba 194b, 195, 196San Martín, J. de 8San Salvador 202bSandinistas 57, 118, 133, 136, 148, 201
liberation theology ideas 184–5Sandino, A. C. 136Santa Cruz (Bolivia)/provincial revolution
124Santi, M. 145bSantiago Commitment to Democracy
(1991) 217Santiago Consensus (1998) 78
PROOF
May 17, 2012 14:41 MAC/MUNCK Page-303 9780230354197_15_ind01
Index 303
Santiago de Chile 94t, 217São Paulo 19b, 22b, 94t, 97, 99, 114b,
115, 139–41, 220massacre of house of detention inmates
(1992) 163metal-workers 139, 140–1war in favelas 164b
São Paulo state 42Sarlo, B. 21b, 245, 253Sarmiento, D. F. 135b, 177, 178b, 179,
182, 243Sarney, J. 55Sater, A. L. 251savings 27, 96Schelling, V. 182, 246, 253Schneider, R. 249‘scientific fabrications’ 123bScully, T. 158n, 158‘second liberation’ 136Second Vatican Council 182–3,
prospects 214–16SEDESOL (Secretaría de Desarrollo)
175b‘seizing the state’ 146, 153Seligson, M. 252Selverston, M. 144, 149semi-democratic republics 42semi-industrialization 28, 67, 68, 83
see also social transformationSendero Luminoso 57, 138, 144
see also Zapatistasseparation of powers 156service sector 35, 84, 96, 97
structure of production (Latin America)33, 34t
seventeenth century 24, 38, 199sexual politics 181Shakespeare, W. 179shanty-towns 138, 159, 164b, 173, 186,
194bsharecroppers 141, 142Shefner, J. 174–5bShifter, M. 118–19sicarios (killers) 214bsierra (highlands) 33Sierra Leone 23Sierra Madre range (Mexico) 13,
14m, 15simplistic approaches 4, 32, 36, 130,
195, 221
sindicatos charros 140bSingle Convention on Narcotic Drugs
(1961) 123bSioux 244‘situations of dependency’ 4sixteenth century 24, 243Skidmore, T. 249, 250slavery 23–4, 25, 39b, 40, 44, 90–2, 162‘slavery of sugar’ (Cuba) 48slaves 3, 13, 17b, 145b
manumission 24slums xi, 21b, 119‘small is beautiful’ 152small business sector 72, 85, 86fsmall farmers 85, 86fsmallholders 81b, 114b, 141–2Smith, C. 15Smith, P. H. 176, 200, 201, 204, 220,
249, 252Smith, W. 77, 233–4, 253Smith, W. C. 251‘soccer war’ (1969) 211social capital 172social change 11, 253social citizenship 127, 130social class 4, 5, 9, 11, 23, 35, 49, 62,
224Treaty of Tordesillas (1494) 38Tri-continental liberation movement 2trickle-down theory 61Tropicália movement 194bTrotskyists 144, 240bTruman Doctrine 201‘trusteeship’ 200Tupac Amarú II 38Tupamaros (1970s) 21b, 116twentieth century 8, 15, 20b,
issue in LA’) 213drugs war 229economic competition 204–5economic take-off 32, 33tforeign policy 213, 217, 221hegemony 216, 231hegemony (challenged in LA) 209b
PROOF
May 17, 2012 14:41 MAC/MUNCK Page-307 9780230354197_15_ind01
Index 307
‘imperial expansion’ (re Mexico) 200imperialism 120–1b, 210Mexican migrants 205migration flows 228–9b, 230m‘most important trading partner’ of
Brazil 207narcotics policy 203‘never the aggressor’ (Reagan) 202b‘new agenda’ (re Latin America) 204plans for free-trade zone of Americas
(contested) 122b, 122race relations 91b, 92‘racist hierarchy’ 200relations with LA 216–21route to modernity 2security issues 214strategy towards LA 226telenovelas exported from Brazil
195trading partner 16b, 18b, 20bUS Congress 209US dollar 65, 76, 214US Drugs Enforcement Agency (DEA)
229US model 247US norm (assumed superiority) 157US State Department 203US State Department Notes 255
United States: National BipartisanCommission on Central America202b
Universal Church of Kingdom of God186, 187
universities 100, 171University of Texas: LANIC page 254,
War of Pacific (Chile v Bolivia) 64bwar on terror 226Warren, K. 253Washington Consensus xi, 35, 71, 72,
109, 118, 125, 130–1, 176, 217,224–5, 234
downsides 110‘not monolithic and consensual’
78see also neo-liberalism
Washington DC 202bWashington Post 255
water 80, 96, 97, 138, 160bwealth 24, 86wealth distribution xi, 17b, 78wealth inequality 36, 41, 84, 100wealth tax 100Weaver, F. 251Weber, M. 187welfare xii, 21b, 79, 80
see also poverty and welfarewelfare state 103, 127, 135bWest Africa 23–4, 232bWest Indies 24Western Europe 8, 32, 33t, 205Western world 1, 2, 12, 19b, 171, 243,
246Whitehead, L. 167n, 252Whitten, D. 250Whitten, N. 250Wiarda, K. 251Wickham-Crowley, T. P. 253Wolfensohn, J. 78women 81b, 140b, 150–1, 173, 220,
235defence of human rights and democracy
90employment 102household heads 85labour force participation 83–4, 88bmarianismo 88migration pattern 96paid and unpaid activities 84participation in political process 129rural-urban migration (gender
selectivity) 84–5transformation of party politics
159–61views of Eva Perón 88–9bworking class 147–8see also gender
women presidents 108b, 148women’s movements 133, 146, 147–8,