Bolivia Research: continued

Back to Bolivia Research

The dawn of 2006 brought a sea change to the economically-deprived Andean state of Bolivia. After centuries of colonial and minority-elite held power, the indigenous-identified coca leader, Evo Morales, assumed the presidency with the promise to radically transform Bolivian society.

As a development studies student, I began to take great interest in the Bolivian story. In the context of the broader leftist ascent in Latin America, Bolivia presents the opportunity to study whether a peripheral country can build alternatives to development that are both economically viable and socially just in the context of the dominant neoliberal global economic order.

I am fortunate that my university, UC Berkeley, offers students the opportunity to create student-led, credit-granting courses that fulfill unmet academic interests. In designing the course and related study tour, I sought out the help of my fellow JKC scholar, Fernando Balderrama, a native Bolivian and graduate student of development and economics at the University of Maryland. Together, we partnered to develop a rigorous academic tour in which we met with government, labor union, social movement and political opposition leaders, development and human rights NGOs, private-sector professionals and leading academics.

The Fall 2006 semester course specifically examined the intersection between Bolivia’s contemporary experience with neoliberalism and its legendary resistance movements, how both emerged and how diverse communities contest power to indigenize and steer development. The 17-day tour, which took place over winter break, brought our group of seven to four distinct regions in Bolivia - Santa Cruz, Potosi, Cochabamba and La Paz, as well as a New Year’s celebration in the famed Uyuni Salt Flats. Each region possesses its own unique local history, culture and political economic structure. Designed this way, the trip offered students insight into the remarkable diversity of Bolivian society.

Morales’ ruling party, Movimiento al Socialismo, promises to expand the opportunities for the deprived indigenous majority by raising personal incomes, improving health and education indicators, and empowering the historically excluded masses with more political voice. With this in mind, the new government enacted major economic reforms such as the ‘nationalization’ of the hydrocarbon sector and a broad agrarian reform package. Further nationalization is slated to take place this year in the important mining sector. In addition, Morales launched the one-year Constituent Assembly last August, charged with rewriting the constitution in order to more justly reflect the indigenous character of the state.

Naturally, such sweeping changes have been met with fierce opposition. Led by the ethnic-minority Santa Cruz elite whose former entrenched privileges are under attack and supported by various socio-economic groups across the eastern lowlands, the movement for political and economic autonomy threatens the central government’s ability to enact its reforms. The hydrocarbon-rich east is the economic engine of Bolivia, and its autonomy movement and opposition to many proposed constitutional reforms foreshadows an intense power struggle that could result in political gridlock or worse, regionally and/or ethnically framed violence.

Our group began this learning project inspired and encouraged by the promise the Morales government offered to alleviate poverty and further social justice. As the tour concluded, we left Bolivia with a collective unease about the country’s future. A rare point of consensus in Bolivia is that society is more polarized than ever. The hope for and the threat of radical societal transformation has shifted political rhetoric and civil society to the extreme. The once-privileged elite are loathe to relinquish their entitlements and the newly-minted power of indigenous people, soaked in ethnic pride, will refuse any reactionary move towards the old colonial social order. As the Morales administration awkwardly attempts to navigate a middle ground (which often appeals to no one in Bolivia), the anniversary of the Constituent Assembly looms on the horizon. If, by the August deadline, the Assembly does not produce a new constitution amenable to all parties, then those expecting radical change and those working to thwart it could clash in typically spectacular fashion.

The following anecdote offers two contrasting perspectives heard in El Alto and La Paz concerning the current state of affairs and expected subsequent outcome in Bolivia. The first comes from Pablo Mamani, a prominent Aymaran professor at the University of El Alto, who spoke of a deep transformative process underway in Bolivia. He believes that the conflicts that haunt the country are the fruit of its history and will inevitably escalate before a new, more united society can emerge. Without disregarding the possibility of internal war, he optimistically spoke of Bolivia's privileged position as a richly diverse nation in which truly unique ‘microcentric’ forms of government can emerge that reflect indigenous cosmovisions - dynamic and rotational organization that circulates through every level of society. In contrast, Carlos Arze Vargas, a researcher with CEDLA in La Paz, voices a common highlander opinion - that the central government does not act radically enough and is simply re-legitimizing neoliberalism in Bolivia, only with a more socially minded façade. He asserts that while the government is busy deploying soldiers to foreign oil companies’ plants, it simultaneously offers the traditional concessionary privileges to foreign transnationals in the mining industry. He remains critical of Bolivia's latest nationalization, labeling it a farce, and believes that substantive change in Bolivia is unlikely.

These perspectives only represent two in a kaleidoscope of views that range from the extraordinarily optimistic to the frighteningly pessimistic. Indeed, the two of us have greatly divergent views of Bolivian society and the way forward. Despite our differences, we both share the same goal: that of increasing the opportunities for all Bolivians to live the lives they want to live. We believe most Bolivians share this desire to move the country forward in unity. The great hope that the Morales election engendered in a global community that aches for greater justice and equity in post-colonial societies is by no means secure. Success is dependent on all sides to generously find common ground on which to collaborate and forge a future that secures the wellbeing of all Bolivians. However, due to a long history of struggle, patience is in short supply. The historically deprived majority in Bolivia must exercise patience and magnanimity towards the opposition. The opposition must likewise accept that a changing socio-economic order is inexorable. With generous communication and sufficient political will, Bolivia can suture some of the menacing societal fractures that threaten its advancements.

In looking back at this experience, we both recognize the skills we have developed in course design, teaching effectiveness, group leadership and administrative logistics. We both realize our increased capacity to conduct and organize research in order to support policies and movements that seek to improve the human condition. The Jack Kent Cooke Foundation has supported our scholarly achievements by instilling the confidence and encouragement necessary to undertake leadership positions. Perhaps the greatest gift Jack Kent Cooke has given us is a community of motivated and like-minded scholars with whom we can develop relationships. The annual retreat brought Fernando and I together to share our interests, thus acting as the catalyst to this entire endeavor. We are both proud and thankful to be a part of the Jack Kent Cooke family of scholars and look forward to future academic and professional collaborations.

Thomas Chupein and Fernando Balderrama

Thomas Chupein is a student at the University of California, Berkeley due to receive his B.A. in development studies this month. Fernando Balderrama is a second-year PhD student in economics at the University of Maryland.