Political Cultures in the Andes, 1750-1950

Bright youngsters with brilliant older siblings are dealt a tricky hand. They have potential, but they must stare down the accomplishments of those who came before. Political Cultures in the Andes has just such a sibling, also published by Duke University Press: Everyday Forms of State Formation: Revolution and the Negotiation of Rule in Modern Mexico (1994). The family resemblance jumps out in themes, organizational structure, and how they build their discussions in reference to earlier theorists. They even mirror one another by employing Alan Knight in the role of Grand Inquisitor, gleefully holding their feet to the theoretical fire.The influential Everyday Forms of State Formation explored the relationships between popular culture and state formation in twentieth-century Mexico, and Political Cultures in the Andes carries on the family tradition for much of South America. Editors Nils Jacobsen and Cristóbal Aljovín de Losada offer what they call a “pragmatic perspective” on political cultures, providing a “neutral ground” between Gramscians (interested in hegemony, subalternity, and postcolonialism) and Tocquevillians (focused on civil society, the public sphere, and institutions). They define the culture of political culture as “a malleable ensemble of symbols, values, and norms . . . linking individuals to social, ethnic, religious, political, and regional communities” that “provides meaning to human actions.” They wisely reject a unified Andean political culture and agree that a focus on culture does not deny the importance of economic interests or institutional structures. Still, they insist that their case studies demonstrate how “human actions are always involved in a complex language of symbols and values that make them intelligible to self and others” (p. 2).As a working definition, however, this “pragmatic” understanding of political culture remains somewhat nebulous. Indeed, Knight contends that historiography’s recent cultural turn, “however rich . . . its empirical foci and findings, has muddied more than clarified the conceptual waters” and has “failed to produce a clear consensus regarding ‘political culture.’ ” By “including everything,” cultural interpretations can forfeit their ability to discriminate, says Knight, and any cultural explanation of political behavior patterns “must display both durability and salience.” Knight believes it is easier to defend regional, or even local, political cultures than it is national ones. He cautiously concludes that some allegiances “cannot be reduced to interest and do suggest a genuine degree of cultural autonomy.” But, he quickly adds, “the cases are few” (pp. 25 – 26, 29, 34).In light of this critique, Jacobsen and Aljovín de Losada further elaborate their “pragmatic perspective” in an introductory rejoinder. When looking for causes, they argue, a focus on discourses, rituals, and practices can help scholars better “understand the scope of choices available.” They point out that people do not act on all of their interests, and so understanding the values embedded in a particular political culture helps explain which ones they choose. Finally, they agree that for political culture to endure, it must build on “the reinterpretation of older values and practices” (pp. 58 – 60, 62).Edited volumes that emerge from conferences can be disjointed and uneven, but that is not the case here. The essays are all worthwhile contributions that represent the state of the art in the culturally oriented political history of South America. They do not, however, agree in their definitions or use of “political culture.” Indeed, several contributors do not even use this phrase.Part 1 examines state- and nation-building projects and their limitations. Charles F. Walker examines the enduring legacy of “institutions, structures, [and] national boundaries” set in place by eighteenth-century Bourbon urban reformers in Lima. He traces the origins of the region’s authoritarianism and instability not to the postindependence period but rather to the Bourbon “cultural project,” which “lingers until today, manifesting itself in the difficult relations between the state and civil society” (pp. 74 – 76). Aljovín de Losada also makes a claim for an early formation of political patterns, examining the Peru-Bolivian Confederation (1836 – 39) led by Andrés Santa Cruz. The decades after independence were “a time of experimentation, when Latin American political cultures crystallized” amid a general effort to synthesize and amalgamate elements of various political traditions (p. 96). Carlos Contreras’s review of Peruvian state finances after the War of the Pacific (1879 – 83) outlines the difficulties of reforming tax collection and expanding state revenues in the face of established provincial and local power networks. And Laura Gotkowitz examines opposing political projects in the years before Bolivia’s 1952 revolution, focusing on the interaction between forceful indigenous political programs and initiatives of the populist state.Part 2 examines ethnicity, gender, and the construction of power. Margarita Gar-rido scrutinizes clashing political ideals in late colonial New Granada, focusing on the “incipient plebeian political culture” of the so-called “free men of all colors.” She explores understandings of obedience and authority and demonstrates the local construction of individuals’ social standing (pp. 165 – 66). Aline Helg argues that both creole elite and “men of color” in early republican Colombia took a “pragmatic approach to the new circumstances” to advocate their different agendas: the former seeking power, the latter seeking equality (p. 184). This alliance occurred in the context of a general failure to challenge the dominant racial order. Derek Williams argues that authoritarian president Gabriel García Moreno’s attempt to create a Catholic state in the 1860s and 1870s successfully rewired Ecuadorean political patterns and incorporated women and native Andeans into a general “pueblo católico.” And Brooke Larson examines the construction of race and national identity in the writings of four prominent Bolivian intellectuals in the first decade of the twentieth century; these writers sought to decrease the undesirable influences of mestizo/cholo groups on “pure” Indians and “to turn an unruly peasantry and plebe into disciplined workers, soldiers, and tax-payers” (p. 249).Part 3 examines local, peripheral, and national networks. Sergio Serulnikov explores manifestations of political consciousness in the Andes during the great insurrections of the 1780s, arguing that these processes are best understood as a “cultural and political empowerment of indigenous peoples” and not as a revolutionary program (p. 257). In analyzing the formation of public opinions in late nineteenth-century Peru (before the emergence of modern mass media), Nils Jacobsen rejects the notion of a separation between “modern” and “traditional” channels of communication and suggests “multiple overlaps between both supposedly separate spheres” (p. 298). Finally, Mary Roldán investigates how Antioqueños interpreted the discourse of Jorge Eliécer Gaitán, the populist leader of Colombia’s most important twentieth-century mass movement, in the years after his assassination in 1948. She argues that during the Violencia, working-class liberals abandoned the upper-class leaders of the party in Medellín and acted on Gaitanismo’s more radical implications.At times one finds that some authors assert the existence of “political culture” rather than demonstrating it, and occasionally the concept dissolves into an ungraspable smoky haze. But most of the time they provide plenty of substance to hang their interpretations on. These issues may be slippery, yet they are fascinating and central to any understanding of power relations in Latin American societies. For those interested in the struggle, this book is an excellent place to start. It should stimulate animated discussions in upper-level courses and graduate seminars

Hegemony · Knight · Political culture · Political science · Politics · Public sphere · Sociology · State (computer science) · Gender Studies · Historical Studies in Latin America · Latin American history and culture · Law · Politics and Society in Latin America