Bolivia's Democratic Evolution
MABB ©
I might as well publish this other article which was also to be published in the failed Sage encyclopedia of democracy and democratization. Once again, enjoy.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2015
I might as well publish this other article which was also to be published in the failed Sage encyclopedia of democracy and democratization. Once again, enjoy.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2015
Bolivia’s
democratic evolution
Introduction
Over the last 33 years Bolivia’s
democratic process developed through three distinguishable periods. An initial
period (from 1982 to 2000) was marked by the transition from a military
dictatorship to a representative democracy, and the subsequent effort to consolidate
the democratic process. A second period (from 2000 to 2005) was dominated by a loss
of political legitimacy and deep social crisis, which, in spite of the efforts
to consolidate the democratic process, placed the survival of democracy into
serious question. The third period (from 2006 on) was marked by the emergence
of Evo Morales, who, together with the country’s indigenous political forces managed
to take control of power with a political alliance denominated Movement Toward
Socialism. This entry aims to outline the development of the democratic process
in Bolivia from the return of democracy to current times.
Re-democratization and Democratic
Deepening
Bolivia’s transition to democracy began in
October 1982 after a long spell of military dictatorships. This period was
marked by a deep economic and social crisis, the implementation of neoliberal
policies in response to that crisis and the efforts of subsequent governments
to consolidate the democratic process. In response of the crisis, the Victor
Paz government took the first steps towards its abatement by introducing
neoliberal policies such as: liberalization of the economy, reduction of public
expenditures, increase of government revenues and reduce the role of the state
in the economy. While these measures promptly replaced the deep economic uncertainty
with a new sense of macro-economic stability, over the rest of the period, the
measures had negative social effects in the form of massive unemployment and
low economic growth. Once the worst of the crisis was surmounted, the
subsequent governments sought to consolidate the economic process. One first
factor was the application of a coalition-building mechanism already present in
the Constitutions known as Accorded Democracy, which allowed the establishment
of arguably one of the most institutionally and procedurally stable periods for
the Bolivian democratic process. Accorded Democracy greatly reduced the risk of
congressional deadlock by promoting the building of majority governments. Another
factor was the implementation of a decentralization program in 1994 under the
label of popular participation, which sought the official recognition of
indigenous and civil society organizations as legitimate political entities,
the incorporation of such organizations in the political and economic process, the
introduction and promotion of participative democracy, the guarantee for
equality, and the perfecting of the representative democratic system. With this
law, the government achieved the deepening of the democratic process by
guaranteeing the involvement of citizens in the political process.
Political and Social Crisis
While the re-democratization process had
been relatively successful from the institutional and procedural points of view,
the efforts to consolidate the democratic process were deficient. On the back
of citizen frustration over democracy’s unfulfilled expectations, the political
system lost legitimacy through: first, the implementation of neoliberal
policies, of which the most damaging was privatization. The government’s
efforts to privatize the many state industries resulted in massive
unemployment; and second, the public and indiscreet manner in which political actors
practiced Accorded Democracy, which often concentrated on the distribution of
public posts rather than the formulation of policy.
The period was marked by citizen
frustration and it manifested itself in the form of massive and confrontational
protests, road blocks and marches, most of which made uncompromising demands to
the government while expecting results. The most significant protest episodes
in this period were: the April 2000 successful reversal of the water supply
system privatization in the country’s third largest city, Cochabamba; the episodes
on February and October 2003 when there were violent confrontations between demonstrators,
military and police forces where dozens of demonstrators fell victim of police
repression; the times protests forced, and not exactly in a constitutional
manner, the forced removal of two presidents: Gonzalo Sanchez and Carlos Mesa;
and the largely irregular election of Eduardo Rodriguez, the third candidate in
the line of succession. The former President of the Supreme Court and newly
elected President Eduardo Rodriguez became president on June 2005 with the only
task of organizing the next general elections.
Post-neoliberal
era
The post-neoliberal era began with the
arrival of Evo Morales in January 2006 to the government. His rise has been of
historical significance for the country because he is the first president with
indigenous background elected through popular vote. While his government has
continued the economic progress began in prior governments, it has also placed
emphasis on the inclusion of indigenous peoples in the political process, consolidating
the government’s central role in the economy and relying on a strong
anti-capitalist and anti-neoliberal discourse to maintain its support. At the
same time, Evo Morales has been criticized for attempting to restrict certain rights
and liberties and for using the law in his favor to solidify his position of
power in government.
During the two terms Evo Morales and the
MAS have been in government they have been able to raise revenues by nationalizing
Bolivia’s natural resource industries. In fact, the export of natural gas to
Brazil and Argentina has become the single most significant source of revenue
for the country. In addition, the government introduced financial transfers to
incentivize children to stay in school and pregnant women to have medical
check-ups before and after birth. It also introduced a minimal retirement
benefit for seniors. These programs have lifted many people out of indigent
poverty. On the other hand, critics have keenly observed Morales’ repeated
disregard for the country’s new constitutional order and of the rule of law. He
has been criticized for the manner in which he and his government have used the
almost absolute majority in Congress to pass laws virtually without debate or
opposition; to gain control of important public offices by removing opposition
leaders with the use of recently passed legislation; and to appoint government-friendly
justices. In addition, he has also been criticized for his efforts to silence
criticism from the media by invoking recently passed legislation which punishes
any statement that can be interpreted as racially motivated.
On October 2014 Evo Morales won a third
consecutive presidential term with enough support to avoid a second round of
elections. This time around, one important objective is to solidify the central
role the government plays in the economy by creating national industries
capable of diversifying the country’s production base. At the same time, the government
plans to guarantee food security by playing a role in the production and
distribution of important foods as well as assuring the price is accessible for
all.
Dr. Miguel A. Buitrago
See
also:
Stages of Democratization; Political Realignment; Protest Movements; Social
Movements; Ethnic Mobilization.
Further
readings
Farthing, Linda and Benjamin Kohl. Evo’s Bolivia: Continuity and Change. Austin:
University of Texas Press, 2014.
Creabtree, John and Ann Chaplin. Bolivia: Processes of Change. London and
New York: Zed books, 2013.
Peñaranda, Raul, et. al. Treinta
Años de Democracia en Bolivia: Repaso Multidisciplinario a un Proceso
Apasionante (1982 – 2012). La Paz: Pagina Siete, 2012.
Dargatz, Anja and Moira Zuazo, eds. Democracias
en Transformacion: Que hay de nuevo en los nuevos estados Andinos? La Paz:
Friedrich-Ebert Stiftung, 2012.
Pearce, Adrian. Evo Morales and the Movimiento al Socialismo in Bolivia: the first term
in conttext (2005 – 2009). London: Institute for the Study of the Americas,
2011.
Cameron, Maxwell and J. P. Luna, eds. Democracias en
la Region Andina. Lima: IEP, 2010.
Dunkerley, James. Bolivia: Revolution and the Power of History in the Present.
London: Institute for the Study of the Americas, 2007.
Kohl, Benjamin and Linda Farthing. Impasse in Bolivia: neoliberal hegemony and
popular resistance. London and New York: Zed Books, 2006.
