Introduction

A country of about ten million people, Bolivia has long been among the poorest states in the world, with high levels of inequality resulting from centuries of colonial and neocolonial exploitation and elite rule. However, since 2005, the Bolivian government has been in the hands of the MAS (Movimiento al Socialismo): a party defining itself as the ‘political instrument’ of Bolivia's strong social movements, which brought Evo Morales and the MAS to power. Morales himself, and many people who came into government with him, came from community organising backgrounds in these social movements.

With a majority indigenous population and strong, radical trades unions, issues of class and race – ‘marxismo y indianismo’ - are intimately entwined in Bolivian radical politics. This chapter will explore how such issues are reflected and refracted in MAS policies. It will then examine the Bolivian experience of a ‘government of the social movements’, in which many leading figures have a background in community organising and social movements. How, and to what extent, have both the policies and the processes of governance of the MAS reflected this? Key policies, such as the introduction of a new Constitution drawn up by a popular constituent assembly, formally entrench indigenous community culture and practices within the state. A growing state role in the economy has provided resources for redistributive welfare policies and increasing living standards. However, as the MAS nears its first decade in power, tensions are beginning to show. While it retains very strong popular support, some accuse the government of an increasingly authoritarian statism and of abandoning its community roots. The entry of social movement leaders into government is said to have weakened the movements themselves, while ex-community organisers now in senior government positions are accused of incompetence. Divisions are emerging between community organisations that were previously united behind the MAS.

In exploring these tensions, the chapter will help to illuminate both the potential and the pitfalls of an attempt to embed radical conceptions of class and race in the state, and an attempt to foreground community organising and community development principles in government policy.