Search results

This article focuses on a crucial aspect of the Argentine labor movement that, in spite of its importance, has not been adequately examined by the existing historiography: the high degree of union structure penetration at the shop‐floor level through means of shop‐stewards and comisiones internas (CI). First, it provides a basic definition of shop‐stewards and CI for the Argentine case. Second, it briefly analyzes the history of these bodies from the early 1940s to the early 1980s, taking into account the most important structural transformations during this period, in particular the transition from an economic model driven by import‐substituting industrialization from the 1930s to the mid‐1970s to a process of deindustrialization from that moment onward. Third, it contends that these shop‐stewards and CI experienced tensions and contradictions, some of which were related to those present within the Argentine industrial working class. Finally, it underlines the importance of taking into account this rich history of shop‐floor organization to understand the strength of the Argentine labor movement in this period.

This paper analyses the experience of 83 countries from the period of 1950 - 2004 and addresses the following question: when do democratic transitions produce (good) bad economic outcomes. Following the theoretical papers of Acemoglu et al . (2004, 2008(a)), an attempt is made to control for both de jure and de facto sides of political power. In addition, the countries with and without the experience of Military Dictatorship ( MD ) are analysed separately. The results imply that concentration of economic power per se produces bad economic outcomes. Besides, the data seem to contain an indication that democratisation induces additional socially wasteful investments into de facto political power. In addition, the analyses suggest that, when the army assumes political leadership, countries with low concentration of economic power demonstrate better economic performance. In terms of Acemoglu et al. (2007), this may support the idea that the institutional environment switches from a "weak" to a "strong" one. Finally, the potential trade - off between democratisation and political stability seems to be mainly relevant to the degree of severity of reoccurring economic crises in countries with MD experience.

Abstract This article presents some of the results of a critical exercise concerning the multiple uses of the past, considering the relations between indigenous peoples, state power structures and sectors of regional society. It reveals how the complex interplay between the construction of a regional mythography and the notion of "demographic voids" (Moreira, 2000) was created at the expense of the forced removal and reclusion of Guarani and Tupinikim groups and the expropriation of their lands in Espírito Santo state, Brazil. The study focuses on the indigenous versions of historical situations, the multiple forms of relationship between the state and indigenous peoples and the conditions of production of ethnographic data (Oliveira Filho, 1999:9).

This article deals with the disputed terminology used to refer to the Brazilian military regime (1964–1985). On one side is the traditional "military dictatorship" nomenclature, which places the armed forces at the center of the political system during the period in question. Conversely, the more recent "civil-military dictatorship" terminology notes that the regime depended on civilian allies in business and government, as well as popular support, throughout its existence. My entry point is a heated 2012 debate between journalist Pedro Pomar and the radical art collective Coletivo Zagaia. I explore how new social actors that emerged after redemocratization have become central to the struggle over human rights in Brazil and, more specifically, how the dictatorship is remembered in the present. This debate among scholars, activists, bloggers, and journalists is fundamentally about memory, accountability, and, I argue, the quality of Brazilian democracy today.

This paper examines the metamorphosis of Nigeria's foreign policy from its traditional posture of a responsible nation in the international community, to a reckless player under the military between 1993 and 1999. Nigeria's reputation as a respectable state diminished under the Abacha regime, whose tyranny led to multiple violations of human rights and breaches of international moral and legal codes. This infamous posture eroded Nigeria's track record of provision of regional and global leadership. Its mineral and oil wealth had naturally imposed extra burdens of leadership in the continent of Africa and the world. The paper critically appraises this significant transition and departure from traditional foreign policy posture and international image during the Abacha era; and using the decision-making model of analysis, it discovers that with the Abacha intervention, a new chapter of domestic trava ils (anti-democracy activities, state-sponsored terrorism, poor human rights records, large-scale corruption and financial crimes, and the creation of artificial insulation against the world), coupled with an unorthodox manner of dealing with the international community commenced, which clouded the good image of the past. Nigeria thus got alienated in the global system. This paper identifies the pacifist role of the successive Abubakar regime, but submits that despite that approach, the grey areas such as the sudden death of Chief MKO Abiola (winner of the June 12 presidential elections) in his (Abubakar's custody), did not allow for a complete restoration of Nigeria's golden era of internationalism. Both regimes had thus bequeathed to the nation an unorthodox foreign policy and an unusual image, a development that compels a curious enquiry. The paper adopts a theoretical approach and relies exclusively on secondary data for analysis.

Defence date: 20 January 2006 ; Examining Board: Prof. Nancy G. Bermeo, Princeton University ; Prof. Donatella della Porta, European University Institute ; Prof. Antonis Liakos, University of Athens ; Prof. Luisa Passerini, Università di Torino ; First made available online 18 July 2018

No abstract availableRealidad: Revista de Ciencias Sociales y Humanidades No. 42, 1994: 871-888 ; La percepción más simple y estereotipada de Centroamérica, es la de que en casi todos sus países las dictaduras fueron una realidad vigente hasta hace poco tiempo y de que hoy la democracia ha florecido. La manifestación más evidente de dicho florecimiento radicaría en la sustitución de los gobiernos militares por los gobiernos civiles. Por supuesto, la transición observada en la región es muchísimo más compleja -y no necesariamente con derroteros tan optimistas- que ésta visión corrientemente difundida en algunos medios de difusión periodísticos y círculos políticos. En este trabajo se propone explorar esta complejidad y plantear: 1) que no todas las dictaduras en la región fueron similares; 2) que las causas del surgimiento de las dictaduras militares influyeron en su naturaleza; 3) que en medio de sus rasgos comunes las dictaduras militares tuvieron muchas variantes; 4) que el desmantelamiento de las mismas se hizo a través de diferentes formas; 5) que el resultado de dichas transiciones no necesariamente ha significado la democracia en todos los países de la región.Realidad: Revista de Ciencias Sociales y Humanidades No. 42, 1994: 871-888