Aiming for regime transformation, post-transition Angolan civil society activism moved from reformism and confrontationism to ultra-confrontationism. Reformism and confrontationism evolved until the 2008 elections, influenced by development thinking (neoliberalism/institutionalism vs neo-Marxism/world-system thinking), in two opposing strategies: 'constructive engagement' vs political defiance. The dispute ended with ultra-confrontationism gaining impetus with the Arab spring, with a younger generation resorting to new methods (information and communications technology and demonstrations). Despite the lack of funding or international links, the newer methods caused more concern to the regime. Nevertheless, they suffer from the same shortfalls as their predecessors: they are confined to an urban/suburban social segment, and unable to attract the majority of the population.
CSOs might not be automatic mechanisms for democratisation and poverty alleviation; under certain contextual factors they might contribute to the survival of authoritarianism and neo-patrimonialism at the level of poor communities. This research intends to address two main questions: 1) what contextual factors condition the adoption and implementation of CSOs strategies?; 2) What is the impact of each strategy on communities, in favour of democratisation and poverty alleviation, or unintentionally supportive of authoritarianism (Stenner 2005) and neo-patrimonialism (Médard 1991, Bayart 1989, Chabal 1999, Vidal 2003). ; Santander Universities
This paper discusses the development of the Angolan political-administrative system since the independence, not so much in terms of its inner working logic which I called post-modern in a recently published work , but focusing in one of its specific processes, namely the concentration of political power and administrative centralization paralleled by an increasing 'elitism' in the access to patrimonial benefits and privileges. Such type of processes are common to many other political systems of patrimonial character in sub-Saharan Africa, however, contrary to what is usually referred as the common path, the Angolan case did not reach a point of operative stabilisation but continued unabated towards an extreme. Constructed over two presidential administrations (since the independence) and having survived the end of the Socialist model, such distinctiveness of Angolan patrimonialism runs the risk of perpetuating itself in the supposedly 'new era' of multiparty democracy. This paper is divided in three parts, the first gives a brief analytical framework, the second and the third deal with the administration of Agostinho Neto and Eduardo dos Santos respectively. ; Cornell Institute for African Development
This paper discusses the Angolan political system after independence. Its haracterisation confronts two interpretative perspectives or what is here called modern and post-modern patrimonialism, each will be exposed. ; King's College London
ABSTRACT This paper deals with the possible impact of the most recent international authoritarian populist tendencies on sub-Saharan African political systems. Contrary to the main currents of interpretation, this paper argues that we are not in face of a new international influence or role model being locally followed, but in face of the most recent example of a long political-historical path of selective assimilation of international trends to local political systems as structured after independence. We are not witnessing to poor local replicas of the most recent international wave of authoritarian populism of 2010s, but to another selective assimilation of political features to serve the existing and locally dominant systems. Through the analysis of the specific cases of Mozambique and Angola, this paper theoretically and historically discusses the nature of regimes and political systems through a critical approach on the most recent historical/political science discussions of so-called hybrid regimes, combining liberal and illiberal features, that resort to concepts such as illiberal democracies, façade democracies, electoral autocracies, semi-authoritarian states, competitive authoritarian regimes, post-neo-liberal States, or new competitive authoritarian regimes, among others.
The political-ideological characterization and analysis of Angolan nationalist movements and the conflicts between them, has always been subject of major and passionate political-academic discussion, which became an important component of the nationalist movements' international and domestic characterization and definition. The MPLA (Popular Movement for the Liberation of Angola) rapidly acquired the epithet of leftist, Socialist and Marxist since the anti-colonial struggle through the independence and afterwards. However, during the so-called founding period of an officially proclaimed Socialist MPLA, in an apparent contradiction, the MPLA's governing practice went objectively in an opposite direction, while still reinforcing that unquestioned epithet of Socialist. It is here argued that foreign attributed classifications (political and academic), influenced by the passionate political-idological struggles of the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s, the civil war and the Cold War, ended up diplomatically-politically assumed (instrumentalised) by the movement itself, whereby an illusive characterization/identification prevailed, hampering a more objective analysis of the post-independence political practice. Our paper will focus on the contrast between the academic discussion on the political-ideological characterization of the MPLA (part I) and the governing practice of the party during the administration of the first President of the Republic, which was the founding period of the MPLA as a so-called Marxist-Leninist Socialist party (part II). Keywords: Angola; MPLA; Socialism; Agostinho Neto administration; political orientation. ; The political-ideological characterization and analysis of Angolan nationalist movements and the conflicts between them, has always been subject of major and passionate political-academic discussion, which became an important component of the nationalist movements' international and domestic characterization and definition. The MPLA (Popular Movement for the Liberation of Angola) rapidly acquired the epithet of leftist, Socialist and Marxist since the anti-colonial struggle through the independence and afterwards. However, during the so-called founding period of an officially proclaimed Socialist MPLA, in an apparent contradiction, the MPLA's governing practice went objectively in an opposite direction, while still reinforcing that unquestioned epithet of Socialist. It is here argued that foreign attributed classifications (political and academic), influenced by the passionate political-idological struggles of the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s, the civil war and the Cold War, ended up diplomatically-politically assumed (instrumentalised) by the movement itself, whereby an illusive characterization/identification prevailed, hampering a more objective analysis of the post-independence political practice. Our paper will focus on the contrast between the academic discussion on the political-ideological characterization of the MPLA (part I) and the governing practice of the party during the administration of the first President of the Republic, which was the founding period of the MPLA as a so-called Marxist-Leninist Socialist party (part II). Keywords: Angola; MPLA; Socialism; Agostinho Neto administration; political orientation.
Abstract Development thinking has been progressively dominated by neo-institutionalism, influencing major donors in Africa, and recently included in the UN 2030 Agenda for development. This paper discusses some unintended impacts of such strategies in neo-patrimonial regimes such as Angola and Mozambique, whereby neo-institutionalism favoured donors' apolitical "partnership" with resilient neo-patrimonial structures, facilitating its recycling, sophistication, and modernization, taking advantage of financial globalization to its own ends and improving its democratic image through elections, but leaving untouched the principles of neo-patrimonial political management for a minority to hold on to power since independence. Theoretically, this approach contrasts with varieties of democracy and varieties of capitalism perspectives.
Der Band vereint die auf einer Konferenz in London (Research on Lusophone Africa) im Mai 2002 vorgelegten Papiere. Die ersten fünf Beiträge konzentrieren sich auf die Entwicklung von Angola und Mosambik seit der Unabhängigkeit; das Schwergewicht liegt auf der jüngeren Vergangenheit. Es wird versucht die Entwicklung der beiden Länder in die Debatte um Patrimonialismus, den Niedergang der Zivilgesellschaft und die Zukunft des Nationalstaates als Vehikel der Modernisierung einzubetten. Braathen stellt die Frage, warum die lokale politische Entwicklung in Mosambik seit dem Friedensabkommen von 1992 kaum vorangekommen ist. Rocca/Riccardi zeichnen den Weg zum Friedensabkommen für Mosambik nach. Tornimbini untersucht die Bewegungen von Arbeitskräften im Distrikt Beira und zwischen Mosambik und den Nachbarstaaten am Ende der Kolonialzeit (1942-60). (DÜI-Sbd)
