Crisis Of Hegemony Research Articles

Gramsci and Latin America

Gramsci has a long history in Latin America, where his influence is surpassed only by that in his native Italy. Translation of his work into Spanish and Portuguese occurred some time before its English and French translations. The classic Gramscian themes of hegemony, revolution, Caesarism/Bonapartism, war of maneuver/war of posi tion, national popular, and so on, have hugely influenced critical social theory in many parts of Latin America. Any contemporary reconstruction of a viable left alterna tive going beyond debilitating binary opposition of reform versus revolution needs to take account of Gramci's complex and open-ended work. Adam Morton's Unravelling Gramsci focuses on Gramsci's theory of uneven development and, with its extensive Latin America material, should be seen as a contribution to this task. Morton starts off with a broad overview of North/South question of uneven development in Gramsci's thought. Italy's Questione Meridionale is clearly relevant to contemporary critical theories of development, and it also helps guide our under standing of alternative processes of state formation elsewhere. Morton's engagement with Gramsci is based on placing him firmly in his own political time. In this it dif fers from earlier custom, especially in English-speaking world, of associat ing Gramsci with whatever political project was being promoted (for example, Eurocommunism). Gramsci was also a convenient fig leaf for Marxists moving into post-Marxism or beyond. In contrast to this Gramsci of sound bites or mechanical applicationof his concepts in a dehistoricized way, Morton takes us into Gramsci's theoretical/political workshop to see how he forged his concepts. Perhaps of most interest to readers of Latin American Perspectives will be sections on history of Mexico as a passive revolution. Neoliberal restructuring in 1980s and 1990s led to a worsening crisis of hegemony, reminiscent of Gramsci's theme of a ruling class that is still dominant but not leading or hegemonic. The contradictions of neoliberalism became more apparent, and, to quote Gramsci, the great masses bec[a]me detached from their traditional ideologies. Finally, book takes up emergence of Ejercito Zapatista de Liberacion Nacional in terms of Gramsci's counterhegemonic forms of resistance. Interestingly, and perhaps in con trast to much Zapatista analysis, Gramscian perspective, to quote Gramsci again, takes national as point of departure . . . yet perspective is international and cannot be otherwise (173). This is an elegant analysis showing potential for renewed interest in Gramsci from a Latin American perspective. Morton is urging us not to apply Gramsci but, rather, to internalize his method of thinking to help create alternative futures. In doing so we can build on pioneer ing work of Jose Arico (1988), Juan Carlos Portantiero (1993), and Carlos Coutinho

Imag(in)ing September 11

This study analyzes the Denver Post's reportage on the frame contest between the dominant narrative of the September 11 terrorist attacks set out by President Bush and a challenge to that narrative in an Internet essay by Professor Ward Churchill. The authors find that by refusing to interrogate Churchill's sociopolitical argument, reducing it to the offensive rhetorical trope “little Eichmanns” he used to describe the victims of the attacks, and pillorying Churchill as a person and scholar, the Post assured his counterframe would not achieve parity with the dominant frame. The authors interpret this as an example of media hegemony and situate the Post's coverage within a crisis of hegemony that left the “sacred core” of the Bush frame—American innocence and moral exceptionalism—vulnerable to contestation. Because the Churchill counterframe flagrantly transgressed that “sacred core,” it became the irresistible target of media hegemony strategies by the Denver Post.

Maio-junho de 1968 na França o epicentro de uma crise de hegemonia (parte I)

Neste artigo, o autor reexamina a história de um ciclo de lutas sociais, políticas e culturais como epicentro da crise de hegemonia. Na base das principais radicalizações políticas estudantis, operárias e dos novos movimentos sociais do maio-junho de 1968, ainda estão as lutas de classes, com tudo o que têm de indeterminado a priori, na medida em que resultam da evolução das correlações de forças cujos protagonistas não podem dominar ou prever. Se, em tal história, tudo não é possível, também nada é escrito com antecedência. Conseqüentemente, não era necessário que esta história terminasse como (provisoriamente) se concluiu. Na França, como em outros lugares, a História continua.

En torno a la desilusión argentina

Con base en una revisión de la bibliografía que aborda el tema del fracaso argentino, y tomando en consideración las obras de cinco intelectuales que fueron, de alguna manera, especialistas en nombrar "los males del país" -Lucas Ayarragaray, Leopoldo Lugones, Benjamín Villafañe, Ezequiel Martínez Estrada y Julio Irazusta-, el artículo explora respuestas posibles para los interrogantes siguientes: ¿cómo definir el concepto de fracaso?; ¿cuándo datar la emergencia del tópico en la historia cultural argentina?; ¿cómo articular su aparición con procesos económicos y sociales más generales?; ¿cómo jalonar las peripecias de esa idea?; ¿cómo caracterizar, cómo clasificar, sus principales expresiones?; ¿cómo pensar la significación global de toda esa dinámica…? El planteamiento general destaca que el tópico del fracaso argentino adquirió sus rasgos decisivos durante la primera mitad del siglo XX, a través de una dinámica compleja que, más allá de sus especificidades, parece haber contribuido a la erosión de una entera configuración ideológico-cultural, caracterizada por un notorio impulso de futuridad, a la que denomino ilusión argentina. Como telón de fondo del proceso cabe mencionar la creciente complejización social, la cada vez mayor y disonante diversificación discursiva (Tulio Halperín) y la profunda crisis de hegemonía experimentadas por el país a lo largo del período.

O desenvolvimento meandroso da educação brasileira entre o estado e o mercado

O artigo questiona a imagem da privatização da educação brasileira como um processo generalizado e contínuo. Defende que a privatização consiste num processo cheio de meandros, que não comporta resposta simples, porque as forças que a determinam ora incentivam o crescimento do setor público, ora do setor privado, ora de ambos. Como sustentação da argumentação, é examinada a legislação federal relativa aos incentivos às instituições privadas nas últimas quatro décadas, assim como as estatísticas de alunos dos três níveis de ensino. O autor chama a atenção para o fato de que o aumento do número de alunos do ensino médio público gera uma nova qualidade, que exige um novo currículo. O artigo conclui que o caráter meandroso dessas fronteiras expressa, de um lado, uma crise de hegemonia no que concerne à natureza do Estado republicano e, de outro, o travamento de uma qualidade de que a educação brasileira carece, qual seja, a da clareza na distinção entre o público e o privado, em sua dimensão institucional e curricular.

The Impasses of U.S. Hegemony

A prospective long-term model of U.S. hegemony based on the systemic cycles proposed by the Fernand Braudel Center group (mainly Giovanni Arrighi), the cycles of Nicolai Kondratieff, and the notion of civilizational crisis based on Radovan Richta’s work on the techno-scientific revolution allows us to view the U.S. crisis of hegemony as one of the most important events in the contemporary world. It points to the possibility of constructing a complex of antioligarchic forces that, complemented by the emergence of cultural and political elements that would support peace-centered world mobilization, would unite periphery and center, East and West, in the pursuit of a planetary civilization.

Popular revolutionary nationalism in Bolivia (Ideological formations and transformations, 1930 - 1955)

SUMMARY This article analyses the processes of construction of the Bolivian popular revolutionary nationalist thought since the Chaco war until the first phase of the Movimiento Nacionalista Revolucionario (MNR) government. After placing this school of thought in the Bolivian ideological spectrum of the time, the relationships between the crisis of hegemony provoked by the Chaco war and the transformation of the discursive formations are studied. The central part of this paper contains an analysis of the discourses elaborated by the main ideologues of the movement. Finally, keeping in mind that they were militants and propagandists dedicated to an intense proselytism (through articles in newspapers and magazines, pamphlets and manifestos), next to a list of books published along their lives, another list of abridged books edited by relatives and friends after the passing away of the authors is added.

Crise politique et transnationalisation de l’État en Amérique latine : une interprétation théorique

If the crisis of the state has been a common trait in Latin America, its manifestations have not been the same throughout the continent. This article examines two general and apparently contraditory trends : the trend toward authoritarian capitalism resulting from the crisis of hegemony in South America and the trend towards popularly-based insurgency resulting from a crisis of domination in most of Central America. The author bases his general interpretation of these trends on the analysis of the historical and structural relationships between four factors identified as responsible for the drastic change in the role of the state, from "national development" to "national security" : the crisis in the model of accumulation, the growing polarization of political alliance, the transnationalization of the civil society and the state, and the interplay between relative autonomy of the state and transnationalization. He finds that the combination of transnational integration of the Latin American elites into one U.S.-centered project with hegemonic pretensions, and a growing marginalization and alienation on the part of the bulk of the internal constituencies has brought about an acute crisis of both legitimation and domination. As violence becomes the most common political currency -with repression and plain state terrorism evolving into a distinct style of politics - and the prospects towards redemocratization being very fragile, the author concludes that revolutionary struggles may be the only possibility for an indigenous redefinition of development, national self-determination and democracy.

The Turkish Pendulum between Globalization and Security: From the Late Ottoman Era to the 1930s

The primary goal of this article is to understand the historical dynamics which led in Turkey to the emergence of a pendulum between liberalization/ globalization at the time perceived as integration with the modern and popular west, in particular, Europe and national security, seen as the preservation of the Ottoman lands against both external (ironically the large European powers and Russia) and internal enemies (internal in the sense of those nations and ethnic groups which aspired to be independent of Ottoman rule and which were, again ironically, open therefore to the manipulation of the external enemies). To understand these dynamics requires two main missions. First, by looking into the political liberalization initiatives of the late Ottoman era (seen in the most general sense as those attempts to share political power with the Sultan) and their relation with the tremendous public concern over the empire's security, the article explores the genealogy and formation as well as the overwhelmingly shared perception of a dichotomous relationship between security and liberalization.' Second, by carrying out a detailed analysis of the two attempts to introduce multi-party politics during the republican era, I try to show how the previously identified dichotomy between liberalization and security developed into a 'national security syndrome', through which the democratic liberalization process would be systematically administered, managed and, ultimately, contained. It can be argued that the Ottoman state was, by and large, a garrison state, in which the waging of war was one of the main factors behind its construction and resulting structure.2 At a time in history when the rule of the day was conquest, power, alliances and geopolitics, the Ottoman state was a true example of a geopolitical state/empire. This primacy of geopolitics made the Ottoman state a largely centralized and highly hierarchical power apparatus at the hands of the sultans, and for the most part, security issues were able to be handled quite efficiently.

The Triple Crisis of the University and its Reinvention

Universities are living a triple crisis of hegemony, of legitimacy and institutional. This crisis is coterminous with the fiscal crisis of the state and the crisis of the welfare state. The loss of legitimacy of the welfare state gave rise to an increasing role of the market and to the change of the university from a ‘social institution’ to a mere ‘social organization’ while new managerial values seem to be replacing the traditional modes of academic governance. It is necessary for higher education to be reinvented and for academics to present again the case for higher education. But this needs to be a new case, not a restatement of the former.

Metamorfoses do Estado brasileiro no final do século XX

O artigo procura reconstruir o processo de crise do Estado varguista e de transição para a forma nova forma de Estado, moderadamente liberal em termos econômicos e democrática em termos políticos, que emergiu nos anos de 1990, ganhou solidez durante sob a presidência de Fernando Henrique Cardoso e foi reiterada com a eleição de Luiz Inácio da Silva. Procura-se explorar a natureza da crise de hegemonia que marcou o início da transição política brasileira, no início dos anos de 1980, e caracterizar a emergência de um novo padrão hegemônico de dominação. Ressalta-se principalmente os dois aspectos principais da transição política a democratização política e a liberalização econômica procurando-se salientar as transformações da sociedade nacional e da ordem mundial em que se inserem.

On the Relation Between Global Modernity and Nationalism: The Crisis of Hegemony and the Rise of (Islamic) Identity in Turkey

Turkey did not rise phoenix-like out of the ashes of the Ottoman Empire. It was ‘made’ in the image of the Kemalist elite which won the national struggle against foreign invaders and the old regime. Thereafter, the image of the country kept changing as the political elite grew and matured, and as it responded to challenges both at home and abroad. This process of ‘making’ goes on even today (Ahmad 1993, p.i).The process of contemporary globalization in its most general form involves a tension between universalism and particularism (see Robertson, 1992, pp. 8-61). On the one hand, with Francis Fukuyama’s “the end of history thesis” which suggests universalization of liberal democracy, along with the globalization of free market ideology, the dissolution of differences into sameness can be said to mark an emergence of cultural homogenization. On the other hand, it can be suggested that particularistic conflicts have begun to dictate the mode of articulation of political practices and ideological/discursive forms in global relations, which draws our attention to the tendency towards cultural heteroge-nization. Arjun Appadurai asserts in this context that “the central problem of today’s global interactions is the tension between cultural homogenization and cultural heterogenization”, or, as he puts it:the central feature of global culture today is the politics of the mutual effort of sameness and difference to cannibalize one another and thus to proclaim their successful hijacking of the twin Enlightenment ideas of the triumphantly universal and the resiliently particular (Appadurai, 1990, p. 17).

The Monarchist Response to the Beginnings of the Brazilian Republic

The economic transformations which the new exigencies of capitalism brought to Brazil at the end of the second half of the nineteenth century caused the emergence of new urban sectors, the end of slavery, the utilization of free labor and the rise of a dynamic agrarian bourgeoisie. These in turn provoked a crisis of hegemony within the dominant classes in the final moments of the Empire which reached the sphere of political domination. Their loss of hegemony resulted in administrative inertia and the impression of a power vacuum since the coffee bourgeoisie was not yet able to exercise the direction of the State alone. With the advent of the Republic, it fell to the army to temporarily occupy power and to institutionalize the new regime, while the bourgeoisie was organizing itself to take charge definitively in a hegemonic form.

The free economy and the strong state: the politics of Thatcherism

Preface - A Crisis of Hegemony - The New Right - From Butler to Thatcher - The Thatcher Government 1979-1990 - The Pursuit of Power - The Struggle for Hegemony - The Conservative Party after Thatcher - Notes and References - Further Reading

The state, Agrarian change and crisis of hegemony in Somalia

Minds don't stay in the past … they can find the truths of the past, come back to the present and look forward to the future. That's not getting lost. The present is when we get lost – if we forget our past and have no visions of the future (Ayi Kewi Armah, The Healers, 1979)

Authoritarianism and the Growth of the State in Latin America

The discussion focuses on the effects that changing forms of authoritarian rule and the growth of a bureaucratic state had on A gentine public policies during the 1930-1970 interval. Hitherto quite separate literatures are brought together in the examination of two different arguments. The first, drawn from the emerging literature on authoritarianism and corporatism in Latin America, suggests that the trends in Argentine public policies should have been interrupted whenever different types of authoritarian coalitions sequentially replaced each other in power. The second thesis, drawn primarily from research on Latin American bureaucracies and North American policy analyses, suggests that there is a need to disaggregate the coalition/policy linkage. It hypothesizes that four factors which developed at about the midpoint of the 1930-1970 period in Argentina—the growth of a large and well-entrenched public sector, limitations on the ability of political elites to press their policy demands, limitations on previously uncommitted resources, and the existence of a crisis of hegemony—should have increasingly constrained the policy-making importance of the coalitions and the leaders who represented them in the highest levels of government. Coalitions and elites should have been increasingly unable to direct and indirect policies in the ways which they preferred. Interrupted time-series analyses of seven policy series provided support for the constraints thesis. Coalitions and those who governed at the top were once important in Argentina as the authoritarian literature suggests. Coalition changes did not occur in a vacuum, however. Once the four state-related constraints developed, such shifts came to have only marginal impacts on the examined policy indicators.