Associated Readings
- Peter Winn, “Children of the sun,” from Americas, pp. 261-269 (2006)
- José Garcia, “Bolivia: An indigenous movement consolidates power,” in Latin America: Its Problems and Its Promise, pp. 443-454 (2011)
- Nancy Postero, “Indigenous responses to neoliberalism: A look at the Bolivian uprising of 2003,” Political and Legal Anthropology Review 28(1), pp. 73-92 (2005)
- Daniel Goldstein, “‘In our own hands’: Lynching, justice, and the law in Bolivia." American Ethnologist 30(1), pp. 22-38 (2003)
- Handout 5. Bolivia Key Dates
Bolivia is one of two entirely landlocked countries in South America, sharing borders with Brazil, Argentina, Paraguay (the other landlocked country), Chile, and Peru. Since the Andes mountain range runs through the center of Bolivia, mountain life is central to much of Bolivian culture. The country's diverse terrain includes the Altiplano (the high Andean plateau), valleys, and fertile lowlands. You can see where the Altiplano is situated in the following map-image. Note that both of Bolivia's capitals (La Paz, where the president resides, and Sucre, where the judiciary is) are perched on the Altiplano.
Having lived in this part of Bolivia myself for about six months in the early 1990s, I can say that the Altiplano's geography is remarkable. You can see the immensity of the Andean "high plains" in this photo of yours truly from back in the day:
Along with Peru and Ecuador, Bolivia is one of South America's primarily "indigenous nations." Indigenous peoples make up the largest demographic group, with almost all Bolivians claiming some indigenous heritage. The two largest indigenous groups are the Quechua and the Aymará. Bolivia's current president, Evo Morales, is an Aymará Indian and former coca farmer (more on this below).
In the following set of pictures, you can see some images of the Altiplano just outside the capital La Paz, of an Aymará festival, and of some focus group research I conducted with Aymará women about childhood respiratory illness:
II. Colonial History and Legacies
Prior to the arrival of the Spanish conquistadores in 1526, the area now known as Bolivia was under the rule of the massive Inca Empire. After the Spanish arrived, they soon established settlements. In the 1540s, the discovery of silver mines around the city of Potosí spurred migration and development. Much of the empire's wealth derived from these mines. Here is Potosí:
...and here are some images of its mines and miners:
Things started to change, however, in the 19th century, when silver mining declined (due to the exhaustion of silver reserves) and power began to shift to a landed aristocracy. (Tin and other minerals would be discovered later and mining would pick up again.) With the decline of silver mining, large-scale farming, primarily in the lowland areas, arose to take its place as the center of Bolivia's economy. The particular model of production followed--especially during the late 1800s--was that of the latifundio. As you may remember from my narrated slideshow from Week 2's blog entry, latifundios are giant, landed estates, and were typically large farms. In Bolivia, latifundios were owned by wealthy elites who typically resided in the cities (analogous to absentee landlords.) Under the previous system, land that Indians lived on was owned communally (by the Indians). In 1874, communal property became illegal in Bolivia, and huge tracts of land were transferred to wealthy elites. The Indians who worked latifundio farms were "bonded peasants"--not slaves and not legally bound to stay. What's more, Indians were increasingly paid money for their work. On the negative side, however, because Indians were now living on the land of the estate owner, they owed rent--placing them in a state of more or less permanent indebtedness.
In 1825, Bolivia became the last mainland colony to declare independence from Spain. In the following decades Bolivia suffered successive incursions and territorial losses as well as political unrest. In 1883, for example, Bolivia lost a war with Chile in the "War of the Pacific" and as a result lost its coastal territories. (Bolivia used to have coastline!) This loss remains a major sore spot for many Bolivians today.
An important point, before continuing: Throughout the colonial period and up until the mid-20th century, the primary non-white, non-mestizo category was "Indian" (indio). When plantation or mine owners looked upon their workers, they didn't see "slaves" and they didn't see pobres (poor people): They saw Indians. Similarly, Bolivia's various indigenous groups didn't identify in class terms, but rather in ethnic terms, as in, "We are Indians." I mention this because it all changed in 1952.
III. 1952 and the MNR Revolution (follows Handout 5 closely)
In 1952, Bolivia had a bona fide revolution that brought about major economic and social change as well as continued political turmoil. The revolution was fueled by the discontent of miners facing decades of exploitative working and living conditions and peasants caught in perpetual debt and without hope of saving money or owning land. Following massive strikes by unionized miners and land invasions by peasants (effectively bringing the national economy to a halt), a political party known as the National Revolutionary Movement (the Movimiento Nacionalista Revolucionario or MNR), rose to power. What did the MNR do?
- They nationalized the tin mining industry. (That is, the federal government forcibly took it over from private groups.)
- They broke up the latifundio system. Large estates were expropriated and land parcels were given to peasants willing to work them.
It was in these years--the middle decades of the 20th century--that the ethnic category "Indian" (indio) which had been so fundamental to social relations became subsumed by another category: campesino. Those of you familiar with rural settings in Latin America may be familiar with this term. It is typically translated as "peasant." It differs from Indio in that it is a class-based rather than an ethnic term. Prior to the 1952 revolution, if you had asked a miner or farmer, "What group do you belong to?" the answer would have almost certainly been "Yo soy Indio" ("I am an Indian."). Post-revolution, the answer transformed into "Yo soy campesino" ("I am a peasant.") This shift from an ethnicity- to class-based identity had significant implications for social mobilizations in the decades to come. (More on this below.)
IV. Neoliberalism's Entry
From 1964 to 1982, Bolivia was controlled by military regimes (dictatorship by military generals), as was taking also taking place in neighboring countries such as Brazil, Chile, and Argentina. The 1970s were tough times for Bolivia's agricultural sector. During the military years, there had been little investment in the highland economy and it had become increasingly difficult for rural families to survive. As a result, the government undertook resettlement initiatives to encourage upland campesinos to move to the lowland areas, especially in Bolivia's southern region. The two areas that received the greatest influx of highland campesinos during these years were Santa Cruz and the Chaparé. (Follow both of the preceding links to see where these two regions are located.)
Soon after the restoration of civilian rule with elections in 1982, Bolivia found itself in the same economic crisis that had been sweeping Latin America (beginning with Mexico's 1982 default on its international debt repayment). To get itself out of this crisis (i.e., to save enough money to maintain repayment of its own debt), Bolivia enacted structural adjustment policies emphasizing trade liberalization, privatization, and a general "opening up" of Bolivia's economy to the international market. In fact, it was the during the presidency of Victor Paz that Bolivia firmly embraced what would later be called a neoliberal model, emphazing the privatization of government corporations, reduction in state subsidies, and a diminished government role in social welfare. Google Victor Paz and see if you can discover why it was highly ironic that it was he who introduced neoliberalism in Bolivia. (If you can find out, squeeze the answer into one of your discussion board postings.)
The 1990s were a fascinating, complicated, and troubling decade for Bolivia. As elsewhere in South America, Bolivia expanded its embrace of the neoliberal economic paradigm, especially under the presidency of Gonzalo Sanchez de Lozada, also known as "Goni." You'll learn a lot about Goni in this week's film, "Our Brand is Crisis" (although the film focuses on his second term).
V. Goni
In readings by Postero and Goldstein, you will learn about some of Goni's major accomplishments, including constitutional reforms which redefined Bolivia as a “multi-ethnic and pluricultural nation." To us, his vision for Bolivia will likely seem paradoxical, since it emphasized both indigenous autonomy and neoliberal economic development. To understand this, consider the landmark 1994 "Law of Popular Participation." This law gave guaranteed that 20 percent of federal tax revenues would be transferred to Bolivia's municipalities (cities). Moreover, it transferred substantial political power to the local level. With this influx of funds and power to cities, however, came enormous tasks. After the Law's passing, cities would now take on responsibility for maintaining services such as health, education, and systems of irrigation for agricultural plots. In effect, then, this Law ushered in the privatization of services for which the federal government had formerly been responsible. Have a look at the video clip below, which provides an optimistic, official government assessment of the "Law of Popular Participation":
