428 research outputs found
Venezuelan Politics and Society in times of Chavismo : Política y sociedad en la Venezuela del Chavismo
No full textVenezuelan President Hugo Chávez Frías is probably the most controversial among the Latin American political leaders of the recent decade(s). The former coup-leader (or military rebel, depending on the interpretation by the analyst), who was democratically elected President of the Republic in 1998, is likewise a forefront figure of the current wave of Leftist transformations on the continent. This first edition of the Stockholm Review of Latin American Studies is dedicated to the topic of Venezuelan politics and society in times of Chavismo. A rather broad range of researchers from three continents have contributed with distinct points of departure and scopes of focus, with the first three articles in English and the five subsequent ones in Spanish. In the first, Daniel Hellinger employs the concept of tercermundismo to approach Venezuelan politics and society in the context of rising and developing Chavismo. Aspects of social and political inclusion and exclusion are analytically revised, as well as other relevant factors behind the popularity (and the rejection) of Chávez. Thereafter, Angel Alvarez presents a series of analytical arguments regarding social cleavages and political polarization in the context of the break-down of the ancient regime and its consequences for democracy. Rickard Lalander then emphasizes the destiny of Venezuelan decentralization since Hugo Chávez came to power. José Vicente Carrasquero addresses certain aspects of participatory democracy and social and political inclusion and exclusion respectively, and offers a balance of accounts of the first seven years of the Chávez government. José Antonio Rivas Leone contributes with an historical analysis of the crises and process of de-institutionalization of the Venezuelan party system, considering both internal factors, as the exhaustion of the traditional parties, and external, like the decentralization process since 1989. In their qualitative study, Friedrich Welsch and Gabriel Reyes approach the possible social, class and ethnical differences between the supporters and the opponents of the Chávez movement, also taking into consideration citizens auto-classified as independent. The study by Carlos Blanco constitutes a critical analysis of whether the regime as officially declared is to be considered revolutionary, or, as the author argues, rather a type of neo-authoritarianism. Likewise, both the behaviour of the government and the political opposition are reviewed by Blanco, as well as Venezuela’s relationship with the United States during the Chávez government. Finally, in the contribution presented by Oscar Reyes, the main focus is the concept of 21st Century Socialism, which in recent years has been used by analysts and by Chávez himself as an umbrella term for the present Venezuelan government
Venezuelan Politics and Society in times of Chavismo : Política y sociedad en la Venezuela del Chavismo
No full textVenezuelan President Hugo Chávez Frías is probably the most controversial among the Latin American political leaders of the recent decade(s). The former coup-leader (or military rebel, depending on the interpretation by the analyst), who was democratically elected President of the Republic in 1998, is likewise a forefront figure of the current wave of Leftist transformations on the continent. This first edition of the Stockholm Review of Latin American Studies is dedicated to the topic of Venezuelan politics and society in times of Chavismo. A rather broad range of researchers from three continents have contributed with distinct points of departure and scopes of focus, with the first three articles in English and the five subsequent ones in Spanish. In the first, Daniel Hellinger employs the concept of tercermundismo to approach Venezuelan politics and society in the context of rising and developing Chavismo. Aspects of social and political inclusion and exclusion are analytically revised, as well as other relevant factors behind the popularity (and the rejection) of Chávez. Thereafter, Angel Alvarez presents a series of analytical arguments regarding social cleavages and political polarization in the context of the break-down of the ancient regime and its consequences for democracy. Rickard Lalander then emphasizes the destiny of Venezuelan decentralization since Hugo Chávez came to power. José Vicente Carrasquero addresses certain aspects of participatory democracy and social and political inclusion and exclusion respectively, and offers a balance of accounts of the first seven years of the Chávez government. José Antonio Rivas Leone contributes with an historical analysis of the crises and process of de-institutionalization of the Venezuelan party system, considering both internal factors, as the exhaustion of the traditional parties, and external, like the decentralization process since 1989. In their qualitative study, Friedrich Welsch and Gabriel Reyes approach the possible social, class and ethnical differences between the supporters and the opponents of the Chávez movement, also taking into consideration citizens auto-classified as independent. The study by Carlos Blanco constitutes a critical analysis of whether the regime as officially declared is to be considered revolutionary, or, as the author argues, rather a type of neo-authoritarianism. Likewise, both the behaviour of the government and the political opposition are reviewed by Blanco, as well as Venezuela’s relationship with the United States during the Chávez government. Finally, in the contribution presented by Oscar Reyes, the main focus is the concept of 21st Century Socialism, which in recent years has been used by analysts and by Chávez himself as an umbrella term for the present Venezuelan government
Venezuelan Politics and Society in times of Chavismo : Política y sociedad en la Venezuela del Chavismo
No full textVenezuelan President Hugo Chávez Frías is probably the most controversial among the Latin American political leaders of the recent decade(s). The former coup-leader (or military rebel, depending on the interpretation by the analyst), who was democratically elected President of the Republic in 1998, is likewise a forefront figure of the current wave of Leftist transformations on the continent. This first edition of the Stockholm Review of Latin American Studies is dedicated to the topic of Venezuelan politics and society in times of Chavismo. A rather broad range of researchers from three continents have contributed with distinct points of departure and scopes of focus, with the first three articles in English and the five subsequent ones in Spanish. In the first, Daniel Hellinger employs the concept of tercermundismo to approach Venezuelan politics and society in the context of rising and developing Chavismo. Aspects of social and political inclusion and exclusion are analytically revised, as well as other relevant factors behind the popularity (and the rejection) of Chávez. Thereafter, Angel Alvarez presents a series of analytical arguments regarding social cleavages and political polarization in the context of the break-down of the ancient regime and its consequences for democracy. Rickard Lalander then emphasizes the destiny of Venezuelan decentralization since Hugo Chávez came to power. José Vicente Carrasquero addresses certain aspects of participatory democracy and social and political inclusion and exclusion respectively, and offers a balance of accounts of the first seven years of the Chávez government. José Antonio Rivas Leone contributes with an historical analysis of the crises and process of de-institutionalization of the Venezuelan party system, considering both internal factors, as the exhaustion of the traditional parties, and external, like the decentralization process since 1989. In their qualitative study, Friedrich Welsch and Gabriel Reyes approach the possible social, class and ethnical differences between the supporters and the opponents of the Chávez movement, also taking into consideration citizens auto-classified as independent. The study by Carlos Blanco constitutes a critical analysis of whether the regime as officially declared is to be considered revolutionary, or, as the author argues, rather a type of neo-authoritarianism. Likewise, both the behaviour of the government and the political opposition are reviewed by Blanco, as well as Venezuela’s relationship with the United States during the Chávez government. Finally, in the contribution presented by Oscar Reyes, the main focus is the concept of 21st Century Socialism, which in recent years has been used by analysts and by Chávez himself as an umbrella term for the present Venezuelan government
Despertares Ayahuasca: Testimonio de un curandero joven Tsáchila
No full textEste texto es principalmente la historia de la vida de un joven curandero indígena en Ecuador, Juan Calazacón, un visionario del pueblo Tsáchila que vive en el valle subtropical de Santo Domingo. En un entorno de creciente reconocimiento de la cultura y los valores Tsáchila, junto con miembros de su familia, Juan inició un centro de retiro, "Despertares Ayahuasca" (Awakenings Ayahuasca), especializado en ofrecer paquetes personalizados para turistas visitantes y personas que buscan caminos hacia el bienestar físico, mental y espiritual, que ha sido un éxito relativo. Al mismo tiempo, esta es también una historia de expresiones de lucha y resistencia Tsáchila, y de las experiencias individuales de Juan al enfrentar los desafíos y dilemas de la modernidad. Una conversación entre Juan Calazacón y el investigador Rickard Lalander constituye el núcleo del texto
Venezuelan Politics and Society in times of Chavismo [Elektronisk resurs] : Política y sociedad en la Venezuela del Chavismo
No full textVenezuelan President Hugo Chávez Frías is probably the most controversial among the Latin American political leaders of the recent decade(s). The former coup-leader (or military rebel, depending on the interpretation by the analyst), who was democratically elected President of the Republic in 1998, is likewise a forefront figure of the current wave of Leftist transformations on the continent. This first edition of the Stockholm Review of Latin American Studies is dedicated to the topic of Venezuelan politics and society in times of Chavismo. A rather broad range of researchers from three continents have contributed with distinct points of departure and scopes of focus, with the first three articles in English and the five subsequent ones in Spanish. In the first, Daniel Hellinger employs the concept of tercermundismo to approach Venezuelan politics and society in the context of rising and developing Chavismo. Aspects of social and political inclusion and exclusion are analytically revised, as well as other relevant factors behind the popularity (and the rejection) of Chávez. Thereafter, Angel Alvarez presents a series of analytical arguments regarding social cleavages and political polarization in the context of the break-down of the ancient regime and its consequences for democracy. Rickard Lalander then emphasizes the destiny of Venezuelan decentralization since Hugo Chávez came to power. José Vicente Carrasquero addresses certain aspects of participatory democracy and social and political inclusion and exclusion respectively, and offers a balance of accounts of the first seven years of the Chávez government. José Antonio Rivas Leone contributes with an historical analysis of the crises and process of de-institutionalization of the Venezuelan party system, considering both internal factors, as the exhaustion of the traditional parties, and external, like the decentralization process since 1989. In their qualitative study, Friedrich Welsch and Gabriel Reyes approach the possible social, class and ethnical differences between the supporters and the opponents of the Chávez movement, also taking into consideration citizens auto-classified as independent. The study by Carlos Blanco constitutes a critical analysis of whether the regime as officially declared is to be considered revolutionary, or, as the author argues, rather a type of neo-authoritarianism. Likewise, both the behaviour of the government and the political opposition are reviewed by Blanco, as well as Venezuela’s relationship with the United States during the Chávez government. Finally, in the contribution presented by Oscar Reyes, the main focus is the concept of 21st Century Socialism, which in recent years has been used by analysts and by Chávez himself as an umbrella term for the present Venezuelan government.</p
Retorno de los Runakuna : Cotacachi y Otavalo
No full textEn 1996 el movimiento político Pachakutik –asociado a la confederación indígena CONAIE- participó electoralmente por primera vez y desde entonces el movimiento indígena se ha establecido como una importante fuerza a nivel local, entre otros, en Cotacachi y Otavalo. Estos dos cantones se identifican como la cuna intelectual del movimiento indígena ecuatoriano. En este libro se analiza el proceso político local desde las perspectivas indígenas, principalmente durante el período entre 1996 y 2010. Un enfoque principal está en lo que el autor denomina el dilema intercultural del movimiento indigena, es decir, los desafíos político-electorales asociados a la interculturalidad y las alianzas establecidas más allá de la definición étnica. Igualmente se problematizan analíticamente las implicaciones de los avances del movimiento político del Presidente Rafael Correa a partir de 2006 dentro del movimiento indígena. Asimismo, se examina el faccionalismo dentro de las organizaciones indígenas en Cotacachi y Otavalo. A través del análisis de las percepciones e interpretaciones por parte de los actores indígenas, se intenta captar la dinámica y las tensiones dentro de esta complejidad al nivel cantonal. Es extremadamente importante ofrecer espacio académico a los protagonistas políticos. Por ende, metodológicamente, se incluye una gran cantidad de entrevistas con los actores. La segunda parte del libro consiste en una selección de 16 conversaciones entre el autor y destacados personajes indígenas, entre otros, los tres alcaldes protagonistas del estudio; Auki Tituaña y Alberto Anrango en Cotacachi, así como Mario Conejo en Otavalo, lo que por sí contribuye a llenar un vacío de documentación académica del movimiento indígena ecuatoriano y la historia política local. Rickard Lalander es politólogo, Doctor y Catedrático en Estudios Latinoamericanos, investigador y profesor en las universidades de Helsinki y Estocolmo. Es investigador asociado de la Universidad Andina Simón Bolívar, Quito. En Ecuador ha colaborado con la FLACSO, el Centro Andino de Acción Popular/CAAP y la Escuela de Gobierno y Políticas Públicas para las Nacionalidades y Pueblos del Ecuador/ESGOPP. Es autor de Suicide of the Elephants? Venezuelan Decentralization between Partyarchy and Chavismo (2004), editor y co-autor de Política y Sociedad en la Venezuela del Chavismo (2006) y ha publicado ampliamente sobre la democracia en los países andinos, inclusive varios artículos sobre el movimiento indígena ecuatoriano.From Exclusion to Government in Ecuador: Indigenous Movement Strategies and Political Power Structures in Otavalo and Cotacach
Suicide of the elephants? Venezuelan decentralization between partyarchy and chavismo y Los felices 90. La semilla de la destrucción
No full textAutores: Lalander, Rickard O. (2004) y Stiglitz, Joseph (2003
has Venezuelan decentralization Survived chavismo?
No full textS t o c k h olm REVIEW oF latI n amERIcan Stud IES I s s u e n o 1. november 2006 29 The article analyzes the recent phase of Venezuelan democracy, with a particular focus on the transformations and challenges related to decentralization. The development and proceedings of the movement around Chávez (Chavismo) and its connections to the political process are discussed, as well as certain aspects of populist political leadership and how these elements are related to (and in conflict with) the decentralization process. The populism and power concentration of the Chávez movement constitute a source of conflict for certain principles of decentralization. The decentralization process is emphasized as both a kind of historical context and a focus of analysis. The context of the article is the Venezuelan political party system, while decentralization constitutes the independent variable. It will be demonstrated that the Venezuelan two-party system had been undermined by the decentralization process already before the rise of Chavismo. Both Chavismo and a majority of the political opposition movements are thus rooted in the decentralization process itself. Key words: decentralization, political parties, Chavismo, populism, Venezuela has Venezuelan decentralization Survived chavismo? Rickard O. Lalander Este estudio analiza la época democrática moderna de Venezuela con un enfoque principal en las transformaciones relacionadas al proceso de la descentralización. El desarrollo y los avances del movimiento de Chávez (el Chavismo) y sus conexiones con el proceso político serán revisados analíticamente, así como ciertos aspectos de liderazgo y movimiento político populista, incluso sus elementos conflictivos con respecto al proceso de la descentralización. Desde ciertas perspectivas el populismo chavista y la concentración de poder constituyen una fuente conflictiva para ciertos principios democratizadores de la descentralización. Se enfatiza el proceso de la descentralización como fondo histórico y un tipo de delimitación del enfoque del estudio. La mayoría de los movimientos de la oposición (y del chavismo) tiene raíces en el proceso descentralizador. El enfoque contextual es el sistema político-partidista venezolano y la variable independiente es la descentralización. Se mostrará que el sistema bipartidista venezolano ya antes del auge de Chávez se había visto socavado por el proceso descentralizador
Retorno de los Runakuna [Elektronisk resurs] : Cotacachi y Otavalo
No full textEn 1996 el movimiento político Pachakutik –asociado a la confederación indígena CONAIE- participó electoralmente por primera vez y desde entonces el movimiento indígena se ha establecido como una importante fuerza a nivel local, entre otros, en Cotacachi y Otavalo. Estos dos cantones se identifican como la cuna intelectual del movimiento indígena ecuatoriano. En este libro se analiza el proceso político local desde las perspectivas indígenas, principalmente durante el período entre 1996 y 2010. Un enfoque principal está en lo que el autor denomina el dilema intercultural del movimiento indigena, es decir, los desafíos político-electorales asociados a la interculturalidad y las alianzas establecidas más allá de la definición étnica. Igualmente se problematizan analíticamente las implicaciones de los avances del movimiento político del Presidente Rafael Correa a partir de 2006 dentro del movimiento indígena. Asimismo, se examina el faccionalismo dentro de las organizaciones indígenas en Cotacachi y Otavalo. A través del análisis de las percepciones e interpretaciones por parte de los actores indígenas, se intenta captar la dinámica y las tensiones dentro de esta complejidad al nivel cantonal. Es extremadamente importante ofrecer espacio académico a los protagonistas políticos. Por ende, metodológicamente, se incluye una gran cantidad de entrevistas con los actores. La segunda parte del libro consiste en una selección de 16 conversaciones entre el autor y destacados personajes indígenas, entre otros, los tres alcaldes protagonistas del estudio; Auki Tituaña y Alberto Anrango en Cotacachi, así como Mario Conejo en Otavalo, lo que por sí contribuye a llenar un vacío de documentación académica del movimiento indígena ecuatoriano y la historia política local.Rickard Lalander es politólogo, Doctor y Catedrático en Estudios Latinoamericanos, investigador y profesor en las universidades de Helsinki y Estocolmo. Es investigador asociado de la Universidad Andina Simón Bolívar, Quito. En Ecuador ha colaborado con la FLACSO, el Centro Andino de Acción Popular/CAAP y la Escuela de Gobierno y Políticas Públicas para las Nacionalidades y Pueblos del Ecuador/ESGOPP. Es autor de Suicide of the Elephants? Venezuelan Decentralization between Partyarchy and Chavismo (2004), editor y co-autor de Política y Sociedad en la Venezuela del Chavismo (2006) y ha publicado ampliamente sobre la democracia en los países andinos, inclusive varios artículos sobre el movimiento indígena ecuatoriano.</p
Ethnic rights and the dilemma of extractive development in plurinational Bolivia
Full text linkThe Bolivian constitution of 2009 has been classified as one of the most progressive in the world regarding indigenous rights. The indigenous principles of Suma Qamaña/Vivir Bien/Good Living on the harmonious relationship between humans and nature are established in the constitution. Nonetheless, these rights clash with the constitutionally recognised rights of the nation state to extract and commercialise natural resources (mainly hydrocarbons and mining) under the banner of redistributive justice, welfare reforms and the common good, in this study labelled the dilemma of extractive development. The article is based on ethnographic fieldwork and combines a political economy perspective on the extractive dilemma, while similarly examining the tensions between ethnically defined rights in relation to broader human rights in terms of values and norms related to welfare and conditions of living. The ethnic identity is multifaceted in Bolivia. Large segments of the indigenous population prefer to identify in class terms. The class-ethnicity tensions have altered throughout history, according to changing socio-economic, cultural and political settings. A central argument is that, during Evo Morales' presidency, class-based human rights in practice tend to be superior to the ethnically defined rights, as a reflection of the dilemma of extractive development.Rights of Nature - Nature of Rights. Neo-Constitutionalism and Ethno-Ecologist Resistance in Bolivia and Ecuado
- …
