Suchergebnisse

This article examines how the labor conditions of nurses in Nicaragua have evolved through twenty-five years of health care policy and regime transition, focusing on the period since the return to power in 2007 of the Frente Sandinista de la Liberación Nacional (FSLN). I ask whether the deterioration in nurses' work-related well-being that were imposed by neoliberal health care restructuring have been redressed by the FSLN. I connect findings from interviews and focus groups with over fifty nurses to long-standing patterns in the gendering of care work, as well as the Sandinista track record in exploiting these patterns. Also relevant is the FSLN's mutual antagonism with feminist movements and its incremental but pronounced turn toward a regressive stance on gender equality. Finally, a steady drift toward authoritarianism by the FSLN government constrains the capacity for nurses to collectively assert their interests as workers and professionals.

This article examines how the labor conditions of nurses in Nicaragua have evolved through twenty-five years of health care policy and regime transition, focusing on the period since the return to power in 2007 of the Frente Sandinista de la Liberación Nacional (FSLN). I ask whether the deterioration in nurses' work-related well-being that were imposed by neoliberal health care restructuring have been redressed by the FSLN. I connect findings from interviews and focus groups with over fifty nurses to long-standing patterns in the gendering of care work, as well as the Sandinista track record in exploiting these patterns. Also relevant is the FSLN's mutual antagonism with feminist movements and its incremental but pronounced turn toward a regressive stance on gender equality. Finally, a steady drift toward authoritarianism by the FSLN government constrains the capacity for nurses to collectively assert their interests as workers and professionals. Resumen Este artículo examina la evolución de las condiciones laborales de las enfermeras nicaragüenses durante 25 años de políticas de salud y de transiciones del gobierno, con un enfoque principal sobre el período después del retorno al poder del Frente Sandinista para la Liberación Nacional (FSLN) en 2007. De interés particular son los deterios de las condiciones y el bienestar de las enfermeras a raíz de la reestructuración neoliberal en la salud. Se indaga hasta qué medida estos han sido abordados por el FSLN. Al presentar los hallazgos de entrevistas y grupos de enfoque con más de 50 enfermeras, se examina cómo la falta de mejoramiento en su situación está relacionada con patrones de larga trayectoria en la relación género y trabajo de cuido, y con la tendencia de los sandinistas de explotar estos patrones. De relevancia también es el antagonismo mutuo entre el FSLN y los movimientos feministas, y el paulatino pero marcado rechazo de parte del FSLN hacia la equidad de género. Por fin, la gradual deriva del gobierno del FSLN hacia el autoritarismo restringe la capacidad de las enfermeras de reclamar colectivamente sus intereses como trabajadores y profesionales.

Neoliberal cut-backs in health-care spending have had numerous negative impacts on nurses, but we know less about how they fare when governments move from neoliberal austerity to reinvestment in their health-care systems. El Salvador is an apt case to examine for how a post-neoliberal health-care reform, launched in 2010 by the newly elected FMLN government, addresses the deterioration in nurses' work conditions caused by austerity policies. Based mainly on focus groups, interviews and participant observation conducted in the first three years of the reform's implementation, the analysis finds important strides for nurses, especially in increased hiring in the expanded components of public health-care, and the reduction of labor precarity in formal employment. But several problems continue to imperil nurses' well-being, reflecting, in part, a persistent devaluation of the care work that is performed mainly by women.

AbstractFocusing on the social movement that resisted the privatization of health care in El Salvador in 2002–3, this article asks how the movement's multisectoral composition influenced news coverage of the health care policy debate. Specifically, it examines whether the diversity of perspectives in the alliance was reflected in the media's source selection and framing of the policy issues. A content analysis of Salvadoran newspapers' coverage shows that the media relied mainly on just two movement actors to represent the antiprivatization position: the striking doctors and the leftist opposition party. It also reveals that a period of elite dissensus on the policy issues opened a temporary opportunity to insert movement messages in the coverage. The study indicates that a multisectoral alliance does not enhance movement influence through the news media, though broad alliances confer strategic advantages for the movement's broader communication work.

Les coalitions de mouvements ne sont pas avantageuses pour tous. Au Salvador, des paysans à la recherche de terres furent marginalisés dans une coalition qui représentait à la fois des paysans sans terre et des bénéficiaires de réformes agraires passées. Lorsque des leaders ont démobilisé leur lutte, ils ont aussi entraîné les sans‐terre dans des activités protestataires dont ils ne pouvaient que peu profiter. Ce problème provient de la faiblesse de la démocratic Cette dernière fut entravée par des modèles de relations membre‐leader issues de la guerre civile, par des inégalités dans les connaissances et les competences des leaders et des membres, et par la centralisation des reven‐dications et des tactiques du mouvement.Movement coalitions are not advantageous for all participants. In El Salvador, peasants seeking land were marginalized in a coalition that represented both landless peasants and past land reform beneficiaries. While leaders demobilized the land struggle, they also brought the landless into protest activities from which they stood to gain little. This problem was rooted in the weakness of democracy. It was hampered by patterns of member‐leader relations inherited from the civil war, inequalities in the knowledge and skills of leaders and members, and the centralized focus of the movement's demands and tactics.We're doing this not so much for us as for our children, so they'll have a place to work, and for their children too. We believe that since we're already dying of hunger, we may as well die fighting for something.

This paper examines the relationships between two peasant coalitions struggling for the cancellation of debts acquired by beneficiaries of El Salvador's various land reform programs. In particular, the paper seeks to explain why, during much of the period of struggle for debt cancellation (1995 to 1997), the two main protagonists of the movement worked separately instead of joining forces, despite the fact that their goals and tactics were nearly identical. To answer this question, I analyse the role of political opportunities, external threats, and competition for resources. I show that despite external conditions conducive to cooperation, the coalitions' initial attempt to work together broke down due to conflicts among their leaders. These conflicts stemmed largely from the evolving nature of the relationship between the peasant movement and the main political party of the left, which had created many of the peasant organizations during El Salvador's 12-year civil war. In addition, an inclination to compete for resources, members, and recognition led the newer of the two coalitions to distinguish itself from, rather than work cooperatively with, its older counterpart. Resumen: De la competición a la cooperación: peligros, oportunidades y sobrevivencia organizativa en el movimiento campesino salvadoreñoEste artículo examina las relaciones entre dos coaliciones campesinas que luchan por la cancelación de las deudas adquiridas por los beneficiarios de los diversos programas de reforma agraria en El Salvador. En particular, este artículo busca explicar por qué, durante buena parte del período de lucha por la cancelación de la deuda (de 1995 a 1997), los dos grandes protagonistas del movimiento funcionaron separadamente en lugar de unir sus fuerzas, a pesar de que sus objetivos y tácticas eran casi idénticas. Para responder esta pregunta analizo el papel de las oportunidades políticas, de las amenazas externas y de la competencia por recursos. También demuestro que, a pesar de que las condiciones externas eran propicias, el intento de cooperación inicial de las coaliciones se frustró debido a los conflictos entre sus dirigentes. Estos conflictos provenían en gran parte de la naturaleza en que evolucionaron las relaciones entre el movimiento campesino y el principal partido político de la izquierda, el cual creó muchas de las organizaciones campesinas durante la guerra civil que duró doce años en El Salvador. Además, la tendencia a competir por recursos, miembros y reconocimiento, llevó a la coalición más reciente a diferenciarse de su par más antiguo, antes que a cooperar con él.

This special issue of CJS illustrates the international spread of an empassioned debate among sociologists about the future direction of their discipline ignited by Michael Burawoy's call to elevate the presence and status of public sociology. Burawoy's program entails a greater engagement by sociologists with civil society (non-governmental organizations, communities, movements) in the development of their research agenda, and the production of research outputs that are more accessible, relevant, and useful to non-academic audiences. Burawoy and his supporters see the emphasis on public sociology as a way to revitalize the discipline, in particular, to solve several inter-related problems that it faces, at least in the U.S: a lack of internal coherence, declining public legitimacy, public misapprehension of what sociologists do, and minimal influence on policy-making (Burawoy 2004a, Turner 2006, Boyns and Fletcher 2005). Skeptics and critics within the discipline, conversely, argue that "going public" will only hurt sociology's public legitimacy, insofar as it constitutes a kind of left-liberal moralizing that is out of sync with majority currents of opinion.

"The 2016 US presidential election exposed rising xenophobic and nationalist sentiment within the United States and other democratic countries. As populist movements grow, democratic freedoms erode. We Resist demonstrates that the things we often take for granted--safety, family, employment, health, a promising future--are under attack, and we must fight to preserve these resources before it's too late. We are currently witnessing the dismantlement of social programs, growing disinterest in international cooperation, and the devaluation of evidence-based knowledge. This disturbing shift in politics is leading to increased national security measures, violations to basic human rights, and widening social and economic inequalities. The rise of far-right populism brings with it intolerance of ethnic, sexual, and all other minority groups, and a rejection of democratic society. We Resist gathers the compelling perspectives of scholars and activists who are deeply embedded within political and community struggles, who participate in policy decisions, and who are engaged in research that advances those struggles. An essential and timely book, We Resist confronts the problems we face as a human community and impels a cross-sectoral movement to defend our rights and revitalize the common good. "Into a world of bully-boy heads of state and the rise of xenophobic right-wing populism, comes this important collection reminding us that the common good is still attainable, if fragile. It depends on our ability to work collectively, to build community and to cherish our diversity, always advocating for human rights, respect and dignity. This collection of the best of Canadian values is a gift to the world in its time of need." Maude Barlow, chairperson for the Council of Canadians and author of Boiling Point: Government Neglect, Corporate Abuse, and Canada's Water Crisis"--