After Servitude: Elusive Property and the Ethics of Kinship in Bolivia by Mareike Winchell (review)

IF 0.8 3区 社会学 Q3 ANTHROPOLOGY Anthropological Quarterly Pub Date : 2023-01-01 DOI:10.1353/anq.2023.0004
S. Ellison
{"title":"After Servitude: Elusive Property and the Ethics of Kinship in Bolivia by Mareike Winchell (review)","authors":"S. Ellison","doi":"10.1353/anq.2023.0004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"A global Land Back movements and Indigenous assertions of sovereignty in the face of settler colonialism, Mareike Winchell’s After Servitude examines the ongoing struggle to achieve justice in the wake of colonial violence and Indigenous dispossession in Bolivia. Following the election of Evo Morales in 2005, Bolivia’s Movement Toward Socialism (MAS) party re-centered land reform as a means to redress the legacies of racialized servitude epitomized by the country’s former hacienda system. Those efforts built on revolutionary and reformist projects dating back to the early 20th century, which sought to end the unpaid, obligatory servitude known as pongueaje that pervaded large rural estates, alongside other racial and often sexual exploitations that accompanied hierarchical labor relations between Indigenous, white, and mestizo Bolivians (Anthias 2021, Fabricant 2012, Soliz 2021). The Morales Administration framed its iteration of land reform as part of a broader decolonizing platform bent on responding to Indigenous demands and breaking with both a colonial past and neoliberal present. Yet, as Winchell shows in After Servitude, Morales-era land titling projects shared foundational assumptions with Liberal (Lockean) framings of emancipation as something best achieved through property ownership and as a means to secure mastery over oneself as a modern, autonomous citizen, threatening to eclipse other ways of being in relation with the land and each other. Given the centrality of land to so many movements for reparation, Winchell was surprised to find that many of the presumed beneficiaries of these Morales-era policy agendas frequently expressed skepticism about state-led individual and collective land titling in the rural Cochabamba","PeriodicalId":51536,"journal":{"name":"Anthropological Quarterly","volume":"96 1","pages":"181 - 191"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Anthropological Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/anq.2023.0004","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ANTHROPOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

A global Land Back movements and Indigenous assertions of sovereignty in the face of settler colonialism, Mareike Winchell’s After Servitude examines the ongoing struggle to achieve justice in the wake of colonial violence and Indigenous dispossession in Bolivia. Following the election of Evo Morales in 2005, Bolivia’s Movement Toward Socialism (MAS) party re-centered land reform as a means to redress the legacies of racialized servitude epitomized by the country’s former hacienda system. Those efforts built on revolutionary and reformist projects dating back to the early 20th century, which sought to end the unpaid, obligatory servitude known as pongueaje that pervaded large rural estates, alongside other racial and often sexual exploitations that accompanied hierarchical labor relations between Indigenous, white, and mestizo Bolivians (Anthias 2021, Fabricant 2012, Soliz 2021). The Morales Administration framed its iteration of land reform as part of a broader decolonizing platform bent on responding to Indigenous demands and breaking with both a colonial past and neoliberal present. Yet, as Winchell shows in After Servitude, Morales-era land titling projects shared foundational assumptions with Liberal (Lockean) framings of emancipation as something best achieved through property ownership and as a means to secure mastery over oneself as a modern, autonomous citizen, threatening to eclipse other ways of being in relation with the land and each other. Given the centrality of land to so many movements for reparation, Winchell was surprised to find that many of the presumed beneficiaries of these Morales-era policy agendas frequently expressed skepticism about state-led individual and collective land titling in the rural Cochabamba
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Mareike Winchell的《在奴役之后:玻利维亚的隐性财产与亲属关系伦理》(综述)
Mareike Winchell的《After Servitude》是一部全球性的“土地回归”运动和面对定居者殖民主义的土著人主权主张,探讨了玻利维亚殖民暴力和土著人被剥夺权利后为实现正义而进行的持续斗争。2005年埃沃·莫拉莱斯当选后,玻利维亚社会主义运动党重新将土地改革作为一种手段,以纠正该国前庄园制度所体现的种族化奴役的遗留问题。这些努力建立在20世纪初的革命和改革项目的基础上,这些项目旨在结束遍布大型农村庄园的被称为pongueaje的无偿义务奴役,以及伴随着土著、白人和混血玻利维亚人之间等级劳动关系而来的其他种族剥削,通常是性剥削(Anthias 2021,Fabricant 2012,Soliz 2021)。莫拉莱斯政府将其土地改革的迭代视为一个更广泛的非殖民化平台的一部分,该平台致力于回应土著人的要求,打破殖民地的过去和新自由主义的现在。然而,正如温切尔在《服务之后》中所展示的那样,莫拉莱斯时代的土地所有权项目与自由党(Lockean)框架有着共同的基本假设,即解放是通过财产所有权实现的最佳方式,也是确保作为一个现代、自主的公民掌握自己的一种手段,有可能掩盖与土地和彼此关系的其他方式。考虑到土地在如此多的赔偿运动中的中心地位,温切尔惊讶地发现,这些莫拉莱斯时代政策议程的许多假定受益者经常对国家领导的科恰班巴农村的个人和集体土地所有权表示怀疑
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
11.10%
发文量
30
期刊介绍: Since 1921, Anthropological Quarterly has published scholarly articles, review articles, book reviews, and lists of recently published books in all areas of sociocultural anthropology. Its goal is the rapid dissemination of articles that blend precision with humanism, and scrupulous analysis with meticulous description.
期刊最新文献
The Copy Generic: How the Nonspecific Makes our Social Worlds by Scott MacLochlainn (review) Whetū Mārama/Bright Star dir Toby Mills and Aileen O’Sullivan (review) Screen Media, Technological Innovation and the State in Nigeria Language In Culture: Lectures on the Social Semiotics of Language by Michael Silverstein (review) Crazy, Stupid, Lying, Traitors: Eritrean Politics and Extreme Speech Online
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1