Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 September 2022
Muchos ven el gobierno de Evo Morales y el Movimiento al Socialismo (MAS) como la vanguardia del “giro a la izquierda” en América Latina. Este artículo argumenta que hay una tension profunda dentro de la administración del MAS: un empuje para la justicia social, por un lado, y un abrazo a las instituciones liberales democráticas (sean elecciones, asambleas constituyentes y referenda directas públicas), por el otro. Una mirada de algunos de los conflictos producidos mientras el gobierno intenta poner en equilibrio estos dos marcos puede iluminar algunas tensiones subyacentes en la democracia realmente existiendo tanto como el liberalismo mismo. Sugiero que cuando Morales y compañía empujen su agenda, no solo están tratando de pasar más allá del neoliberalismo, sino también tratan de perfeccionar o “vernacularizar” el liberalismo para hacerlo más democrático y más relevante a los pueblos indígenas bolivianas. Entonces, en vez de pos-neoliberalismo, tal vez vemos esfuerzos de la transformación del liberalismo por medio de interacciones con culturas y demandas indígenas, con la meta de profundizar la democracia.
Evo Morales's Movimiento al Socialismo (MAS) government is often held up as the leading edge of the so-called left turn in Latin America. Yet this article argues that there is profound tension in the MAS administration: a push for social justice to overcome both colonialism and neoliberalism, on the one hand, and the embrace of liberal political institutions (e.g., elections, constitutional conventions, direct public referenda) to do so, on the other hand. Taking a close look at some of the conflicts that the Morales administration has produced as it tries to balance these two frameworks may help us recognize some underlying tensions in both the actually existing democracy and liberalism itself. I suggest that as Morales and his government push this agenda forward, they not only are trying to move beyond neoliberalism but also may be working toward perfecting, or vernacularizing, liberalism to make it more democratic and more relevant to Bolivia's indigenous populations. So, instead of post-neoliberalism, perhaps we are seeing efforts to transform liberalism through interactions with indigenous cultures and demands, with a goal to deepen democracy.
I thank Philip Oxhorn, Elana Zilberg, Roger Rouse, Enrique Herrera, and the two external reviewers of this volume for their helpful suggestions in the formulation of this chapter. This chapter is based on a paper I presented at the joint meeting of the American Ethnology Society and the Canadian Association for Social and Cultural Anthropology in Toronto in May 2007, for a panel organized by Julia Paley. A revised version formed the basis of a colloquium talk at the University of California, Riverside, in April 2009. The comments I received at both events were instrumental to this article's current form. I also thank Mark Goodale for our ongoing and fruitful discussions about liberalism and Bolivia.