Impact of Evo Morales and the Cocaleros in Bolivia

Impact of Evo Morales and the Cocaleros in BoliviaElected President on December 18th 2005, Evo Morales victory into indicant was a significant and significant event for Bolivia. Not only was he the first President of original Aymara Indian descent, of which a majority (62% harmonizeing to a 2001 consensus) of the ground is populated, exclusively also a leader of the coca plant-growers union and the Movimento al Socialismo (Movement for Socialism, MAS). After a long and bleak biography of colonialism, natural resource exploitation, incomplete revolutions and neoliberal oppression in Bolivia, with a democratic judicature long tenanted by elites who did not represent the interests of a abundant majority of the Bolivian population, the victory of Morales heralded the potential for a new era for the poorest country in South America and a cornerstone shift in the countrys history (Webber, 2011 gthomas2219, 2013).Following two landslide electoral victories in 2005 (53% majority v ote) and 2009 (64% majority vote) SAM gained a two-thirds majority in Bolivias two parliamentary bodies, and with that, arguably the stage was set for a revolutionary change ending both the persistent exclusion of the (often poor) natal majority of the country, and undoing the neoliberal legacy of the three preceding decades, installment a local brand of kindism (Salman, 2013 p625). However, soon thereafter critics from the left(p)(a) surrender begun to argue that the revolutionary promises made by Morales on the streak trail and his strong mixerist rhetoric that fostered the support of left innate movements ( much(prenominal) as militant coca farmers) that largely contributed to his election victory form been foregone, broken, and replaced by relatively minor re digits (Webber, 2011). In this essay I de billet explore and assess the main interpretations of the Morales governments performance since existence elective, highligh sackg the debate around the issue, among scholars and affable commentators a kindred, of the on-going struggle for national and social liberation and analyses of the steps Morales has taken in achieving this.Firstly, it is necessary to briefly dig into how Morales came to power and the context within which his eventual presidential campaign was won. In the 1980s Bolivia underwent radical neoliberal restructuring, undertaking market liberalisation at the same time as semi constitution-making democratisation (Kohl, 2006 p305). The hegemonic neoliberalisation processes in Bolivia at this time resulted in the poor bonnie poorer as they were continuously excluded from frugal practices, with multinational corporations and elites emerging as the dominant force. The scholarly consensus acknowledges this tendency as a fundamental characteristic of neoliberal restructuring that can be seen empirically across countries that render experienced this also (Kohl, 2006).Coupled with this, when the price of tin (one of the country s most lucrative export industries) dropped, many Bolivian mines were closed making over 25,000 miners redundant (Howard and Dangl, 2006). Thousands of miners then proceeded to relocate to the coca festering region of Chap are as their only hope of making a living. From there, the miners used their militancy and organisational skills that had been honed by the revolution in 1952 (wherein the mining perseverance was heavily nationalised and unionised) to influence and help the coca growers who were facing crop obliteration as a result of the boom in demand for cocain and the subsequent war on drugs (Howard and Dangl, 2006 gthomas2219, 2013).The miners began unionising the coca growers, helping them to organise and ordain in their resistance against the eradication of coca crops and leaves which pee long been a fundamental symbol of native Andean culture, and against the US imperialism in the form of neoliberalism they were facing at the time (gthomas2219, 2013). It was this or ganisation and unionisation that led to Morales becoming a distinguished figure, coupled with his charisma and apparent leadership skills he eventually became the leader of the largest coca growers union. Eventually the coca growers and some other social movements developed and organised into a policy-making party (MAS) with Morales at the helm, so they could rich person their collectivist views represented in government.On top of his indigenous Aymara lineage, it has been argued that Morales best attribute was his ability to galvanise and shape a vast array of indigenous and social protest movements into a unified political project (gthomas2219, 2013) that has secured the MAS conquest. As a charismatic, likeable and relatable leader, Morales fostered support for his presidency by appealing to the air of discontent among the indigenous majority of the population. He pledged on the campaign trail to canonize the in effect(p)s of the indigenous people of Bolivia in a new const itution (ibid), and as the title of the party suggests, experience cogent moves towards Socialism. Nevertheless, throughout the now-nine years of his tenure, critics from the harder left current have emerged reading that Morales and the MAS have not kept the promises that were made on the campaign trail, and have forgone the opportunities for official change, settling for moderate reformism over revolution (Webber, 2011).Of the esteemed critics such as Sven Harten and Luis Tapia, Jeffery Webber takes the most condemning standpoint in his interpretation of the MAS and Morales, insisting that since elected they have deserted their revolutionary gusto and have resolved to apply moderate reforms and preserve the capitalistic foundations in Bolivia. He requires that many supporters of the Morales government are disillusioned as to what the MAS actually represent and the apparent contradictions that have emerged.For Webber, who claims to hold a responsible perspective, authenticall y in solidarity with the popular struggles for collectivism and indigenous liberation (Webber, 2011 p2), the period between 2000 and 2005 is described as a revolutionary epoch in which mass mobilisation from at a lower place and situate crisis from above opened up the opportunity for fundamental, transformative morphological change to the sound out and society (ibid). However, his extensive analysis suggests that the MAS proceeded to discard the potential for revolutionary structural change and instead settle for a modest push beyond neoliberal orthodoxies as moderate reformism. He bases these assertions on such things as the supposed failures of economical transformations, nationalisations, redistribution policies and attempts at sustainable suppuration and industrialisation (Salman, 2012), citing examples to stress that the MAS did not represent the more radical popular rebellion such as the Huanuni mine affair wherein the MAS administration opted to oppose the miners who demanded nationalisation so not to warn off foreign investment, as well as many others (ibid).Ultimately, these things, among many others, could be a result of the inherent contradiction that has led to the meagre attempts at reform, stemming from the institutional context and the shift towards electoral politics (Hines, 2011) which inevitably presents a clash of interests when an administration, supposedly bent on pushing towards socialism, operates within a neoliberal, democratised framework. It is this that Webber claims has played a substantial spot in the MAS retaining its core faith in the capitalist market as the principle engine of growth and industrialisation (Webber, 2012 p232) and implementing reconstituted neoliberalism having made no trustworthy attempt to remove or disassemble the capitalist economic and political basis, and limiting the potential for popular movements and significant social change.Naturally, many other commentators hold opinions along similar lines . As a Bolivian who had erstwhile had intimate involvement with key ideological aspects of many currently enforced policies, Luis Tapia offers a political-philosophical reflection of how he believes the Morales administration have again, not delivered what was implied and promised (Salman, 2012). What appears to be a common thread and prevailing sentiment among Morales critics is that Bolivias prior(prenominal) revolutionary potential was wasted and has now subsided.Esteemed and respectable analyses such as Webbers warrant appreciative consideration, as most would certainly agree that Bolivia undoubtedly remains a capitalist nation which is exhibiting no considerable maturation into socialism. However, not all share such a pessimistic outlook. Some would argue that Webber and others along similar lines are standard the Bolivian government against an impossible standard, against the ideal program of a suppositious mass socialist movement (Riddell, 2011). For some, emphasis and s upport should instead be placed on the accumulative, tangible achievements of the MAS with moves that have been made towards national sovereignty, social progress, and effective action on global warming (ibid), as oppose to adamant criticism over the lack of implementation of an absolute socialist government activity outright.The refounding of Bolivia as a plurinational state and rewriting the constitution to enshrine the rights of the indigenous majority who have historically been marginalised against formidable odds are regarded by many as a significant accomplishment in and of itself. Despite the lack of a socialist revolution, some would argue that a political revolution has taken place, in that the MAS coming into power evidently represents a sufficiently profound change in the form of interchange political elites and shifting the hegemonic balance of forces in Bolivia more to the side of the lowly classes (Fidler, 2013). This perspective embodies a much more positive, Ro me wasnt construct in a day outlook than the harder leftist critics.Many who release into this category tend to examine Morales active policies and actions to reveal the more positive aspects of his administration. For example, cited by Riddell (2011) in response to Webber, Bolivia led the meeting of 50 governments in Cochabamba in 2010, a gathering that was distinctly anti-capitalist, in that it rejected the imperialist-imposed Copenhagen accord that produced no positive results. It promoted the rights of mother earth against the effects of climate change, and encourage action to be taken by ordinary people as opposed to the governments and corporations that have contributed the most to potentially cataclysmic climate change, creatively applying an indigenous perspective to this crisis. Even Webber acknowledges that this was a genuine step away for the construction of world(prenominal), eco-socialist networks (Riddell citing Webber, 2011).This (the Cochabamba meeting) in itse lf is perceived as symbolic of Bolivia and the MAS goal for sovereignty (Riddell, 2011), and is but one example of steps taken by Morales and the MAS cited to warn off U.S. imperial intrusion, others include the refusal to accept any more loans from the IMF or World Bank, ending dependency on such institutions rejecting U.S. drug policy to reinforce the indigenous importance of cultivating coca leaves and the decision to leave the foreswear Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA) as Riddell asserts, Bolivias campaign to free itself from U.S. keeping and assert national sovereignty is an outstanding achievement, which was spearheaded by the Morales government (2011). Critics such as Webber would certainly claim that this perspective is nave, and that the underlying capitalist roots remain strong which is indicated by the MAS policies, to date for others it is the small, tangible wins that have impacted the country in a positive way that sincerely matter, and present hope for the possib ility of more substantial change in the future. After all, since his initial election in 2005 Morales and the MAS have won 6 consecutive elections, two of which were presidential, seeing a 10% increase in poll majority upon doing so Morales became the first leader in the history of Bolivia to secure two consecutive electoral victories and rule democratically and stably for an unrivalled period of 8 years (Petras, 2013). Based on the accounts from the harder left current that criticise Morales for abandoning the pursuit of socialism and settling for moderate reformism in spite of the views of those that encouraged his victory, questions arise as to why Morales is still so popular in Bolivia and how his presidency has been sustained.One author for the Centre for explore on Globalisation, based on his interpretation the MAS policies, contends that a brief prospect of his ideological pronouncements, foreign policy declarations and economic policies highlights a very discerning politi cal regime which successfully manipulates radical rhetoric and applies orthodox economic policies with a populist style of politics which insures repeated electoral victories and an strange degree of political stability and continuity (Petras, 2013). According to him the key to Morales success has been his ability to implement orthodox economic policies while building a political and social coalition (ibid). What this implies is that Morales has made just enough of the right political and economic moves to ensure support from both the left and right, yet ultimately uphold the status quo of neoliberal capitalism in Bolivia, utilising his erratic position as an indigenous Indian to essentially manipulate his huge base of support with near impeccable execution, making use of the unique leaderships skills that allowed him to come to prominence through the coca-growers union. Based on Petras analysis, that can be the only explanation as to why the MAS remain in power in what this aut hor ironically calls the most radical conservative regime.Unfortunately, the more positive outlook in this debate is ostensibly scarce, with the ostracize interpretations coming from far and wide. As for some of the cocaleros themselves, in particular the alliance of Organic Coca Producers of Yundas Vandiola , the impact of the Morales administration has in fact been disproportional generosity. Despite being promised by the former coca-growing President, support to the coca growing regions has proved to be discordant, with some areas and groups (Chapare in particular) being favoured and experiencing substantial development with others going unnoticed, often the ones who operate outside of the designated traditional regions yet have no other opportunities to make a living. With that, there is surprisingly belittled being done to help the poorest of the country, most of which continue to live below the poverty line (Oikonomakis, 2014), and as Morales continues to face vehement pr essure from the international community to reduce coca cultivation, this issue is likely to worsen.The poor coca growers who have spoken out about this issue serve to recognize the claims of the critics and cynics who claim that despite the radical rhetoric and illusory agenda, Bolivia remains a neoliberal government like any other, favouring neoliberal economic and political strategies that often dont consider a large circumstances of the poorest people who represent the basis upon which Morales came to power.Unquestionably, changes are happening in Bolivia under the Morales administration, perhaps not on the scale that might have been evaluate by some, but arguably positive changes nonetheless. But is this just part of a strategy to defend the status quo of neoliberalism in Bolivia? Many would contend that it is, as the critical and condemning outcries overshadow the more modest and seemingly nave, positive voices. Many of the careful analyses and apparently authentic perspecti ves claim to see the MAS with Morales at the helm for what it is, a noticeably astute regime that has managed to justify and maintain orthodox neoliberal economic and political practices with radical socialist rhetoric. Or, in fact, the apparent majority of social commentators and scholars could be harm and Morales could be biding his time, securing substantial economic development until the country is ripe for a socialist revolution, at which point he will initiate it. Theories like this certainly do exist, but only time will tell apart whether they are accurate or an idealistic miscalculation.Bibliography Fidler, R. (2013). Bolivia Why is Evo Morales still so popular?. online Links International diary of Socialist Renewal. obtainable at http//links.org.au/node/3437 Accessed 20 May. 2014. Fuentes, F. (2012). BOLIVIA The Morales government neoliberalism in disguise?. online Global Research. ready(prenominal) at http//www.globalresearch.ca/bolivia-the-morales-government-neoliber alism-in-disguise/30148 Accessed 20 May. 2014. Gelder, S. (2010). Climate Game Changer. online Yes Megazine. functional at http//www.yesmagazine.org/blogs/sarah-van-gelder/climate-game-changer Accessed 20 May. 2014. gthomas2219, (2013). The Cocaleros and the rise of Evo Morales. online Aletho News. Available at http//alethonews.wordpress.com/2013/07/30/the-cocaleros-and-the-rise-of-evo-morales/ Accessed 20 May. 2014. Hines, S. (2011). Bolivia Under Evo Morales. online Newsocialist.org. Available at http//www.newsocialist.org/545-bolivia-under-evo-morales Accessed 20 May. 2014. Howard, A. and Dangl, B. (2006). Tin War in Bolivia Conflict surrounded by Miners Leaves 17 Dead. online Upsidedownworld.org. Available at http//upsidedownworld.org/main/bolivia-archives-31/455-tin-war-in-bolivia-conflict-between-miners-leaves-17-dead Accessed 20 May. 2014. Kohl, B. (2006). Challenges to neoliberal hegemony in Bolivia. Antipode, 38(2), pp.304326. Oikonomakis, L. (2014). Bolivian cocaleros on Morales what a monster we created. online Roarmag.org. Available at http//roarmag.org/2014/03/bolivia-morales-cocaleros-repression/ Accessed 20 May. 2014. Petras, J. (2013). The Most Radical Conservative Regime Bolivia under Evo Morales. online Global Research. Available at http//www.globalresearch.ca/the-most-radical-conservative-regime-bolivia-under-evo-morales/5363248 Accessed 20 May. 2014. Riddell, J. (2011). Progress in Bolivia A reply to Jeff Webber. online privy Riddell. Available at http//johnriddell.wordpress.com/2011/05/05/progress-in-bolivia-a-reply-to-jeff-webber/ Accessed 20 May. 2014. Salman, T. (2013). Book Review From Rebellion to clean up in Bolivia. Class Struggle, Indigenous Liberation and the Politics of Evo Morales By Jeffery R. Webber. Journal of Agrarian Change, 12(4), pp.625-627. Salman, T. (2013). The MAS Six Years in Power in Bolivia. European Review of Latin American and Caribbean Studies Revista Europea de Estudios Latinoamericanos y del Caribe, (92), pp.8998. Webber, J. (2010). From rebellion to reform visit and reality in the Bolivia of Evo Morales. online Isreview.org. Available at http//isreview.org/issue/73/rebellion-reform Accessed 20 May. 2014. Webber, J. (2011). From rebellion to reform in Bolivia. 1st ed. Chicago, Ill. Haymarket Books.