The Bolivian national project, provisionally underway with the founding of the in 1825, has been redirected several times in the latter half of the twentieth century. Arguably the most dramatic of these make-overs have been the 1952 Revolution and subsequent Agrarian Reform, and the drive toward neoliberal democratization initiated in 1985. Each has reframed a national cultural politics of identity, successively shifting the meaningful distribution of the native as a cultural category. These shifts have involved rearranging the degree of visibility or invisibility, and mutual relations of emphasis among, at least, Indian, Andean, Highland, Lowland, Quechua, Aymara, and Bolivian-centric definitions of the native. As an ongoing historical process, this is particularly apparent at the juncture of competing definitions of mestizaje (denoting racial or cultural mixing) with successive incarnations of the national project, junctures where categorical slippage is the rule. After Independence and during the early the racial (de sangre) mestizo was ambivalently incorporated into a distinction between the so-called Republic of Indians and the Republic of Spaniards. this scheme the criteria for the stratification of caste (racial-cultural distinctions) and class (economic power) were virtually superimposed, even as class hierarchies began take shape in some regions (Larson 1990). the context of a Creole national movement, native-born Spaniards stood at the apex of their own new nation-state. Rather than as potentially productive mediators between the two republics, mestizos were called traitors, descendants of idolaters, violent, and individualistic. Taken be the product of Spanish men and Andean women, mestizos were sterile, illegitimate, and so potentially disloyal (Rivera 1993:62-69). Conversely, from the Andean point of view, the mestizo colluded with Creoles in colonial extraction, and so were included as part of the oppressive colonial regime. As two analysts concisely put it, in this colonial scheme, In order exist, the mestizo is condemned illegality (Bouysse-Cassagne and Saignes 1992:132). terms of conventional social categorization, at this early juncture racial mixtures were neither betwixt nor between. The late-nineteenth- mid-twentieth-century horizon of liberal and oligarchic politics forged an alliance between Creoles and rural land-owning mestizos. This, then, changed the perception of what today we would call social hybridity. Even as political participation was limited a mostly urban and literate elite, liberal politics reinscribed a more affirmative cultural mestizaje within the category of citizenship. liberal cant the Indian was the primary for the country's backwardness. pursuit of greater economic rationality, the liberals' goal was elevate the Indian the physical and moral level of the mestizo. To be sure, a double standard of exclusionary practices was still easily detectable, but often as the basis for a romanticized reincorporation of indigenous identity (referred as indigenismo), now a part of national democratic window dressing. As Rivera (1993:70) explains the case for Cochabamba, this cultural mestizaje sustained a vigorous popular culture rooted in Quechua tradition but not submitted quite as rigorous a process of segregation. this context, a visible tendency was that of the erasure of specific ethnic differences within the generic category of Indian, usually treated as an aspect of the natural environment. The mestizo became in part a civilizing impulse from within indigenous Bolivia. With its coming power in 1952, the MNR (Movimiento Nacionalista Revolucionario) sought complete the work of citizenship for the nation-state. To do so, it needed erase bothersome traces of the past, reinventing it in order to expunge the anticolonial indigenous cause and to reinterpret an imagined mestizo territory which coincided with the former Inca Empire. …