Suchergebnisse

In the 2000s a new aid regime evolved. This promised to move beyond the former neoliberal approach in a number of ways. It would involve greater consultation between donors and recipients, shift the focus from economic growth to broader factors, including poverty, and hand back the responsibility for this to the nation-state. This approach bears strong resemblance to the rise of neostructuralism, a development paradigm that has become highly influential in Latin America. In this article we trace the shifts in the aid regime and ask to what extent the contemporary regime can be defined a postneoliberal paradigm.

En este trabajo analizaremos el proyecto neodesarrollista en Argentina iniciado en 2002, luego de la crisis del neoliberalismo. Presentaremos críticamente sus fundamento de economía política que remiten al neoestructuralismo. Discutiremos la ausencia de una perspectiva de clase en ese proyecto y su fundamento teórico. Mostraremos como esa ausente conduce a limitaciones para comprender la dinámica concreta del proyecto neodesarrollista, sus barreras y límites. Para ello presentaremos una discusión crítica de los supuestos neoestructuralistas y analizaremos el desempeño empírico del proyecto neodesarrolllista en Argentina. Concluiremos con algunos elementos de lo que podría ser una alternativa desde la perspectiva de la clase trabajadora. ; In this article we will analyze the neodevelopmentalist project in Argentina, that begun after the crisis of neoliberalism. We will critically present its political economy foundations that are tied to neoestructuralism. We will discuss the absence of a class perspective in neodevelopmentalism and in its theoretical foundations. We will show how such an absence turns into limitations to comprehend the concrete dynamics of the neodevelopmentalism project, its barriers and limits. To that aim we will present a critical discussion of the neostructuralist suppositions and we will analyze the empirical record of neodevelopmentalism in Argentina. We will conclude with some elements of what might be an alternative from the perspective of the working class. ; Facultad de Humanidades y Ciencias de la Educación

AbstractThis review-essay offers an extended engagement with Fernando Ignacio Leiva's Latin American Neostructuralism, one of the most important contributions to contemporary Latin-American political economy. It situates Leiva's critique of neostructuralism against the wider backdrop of Latin America's contradictory turn to the Left since the late 1990s, and compares the treatments of change in Latin-American capitalism over the course of the twentieth and early twenty-first centuries developed by the schools of classical structuralism, neostructuralism, and neoliberalism. The essay finds that Leiva's critique of neostructuralism and his explanation for its influence on large segments of the region's Left is the best work on the topic currently available in English. Leiva systematically demolishes neostructuralism's claim to be a progressive alternative to neoliberalism. At the same time, it is argued that Leiva's theoretical framework is compromised by its uncritical adoption of categories from French regulation-theory, and its nostalgia for elements of classical structuralism and its associated development-model of import-substitution industrialisation. Further, it is found that Leiva's implicit attachment to certain myths propagated by the Marxism of the Second and, especially, Third Internationals regarding the national bourgeoisie's role in Third-World capitalist development leaves him unduly dogmatic about the necessity, and unduly optimistic about the possibility, of building a progressive stage of capitalism in Latin America today. The same mythologies prevent Leiva from drawing the appropriate conclusions as regards the urgent necessity of rebuilding the socialist project in Latin America and internationally.

En este trabajo analizaremos el proyecto neodesarrollista en Argentina iniciado en 2002, luego de la crisis del neoliberalismo. Presentaremos críticamente sus fundamento de economía política que remiten al neoestructuralismo. Discutiremos la ausencia de una perspectiva de clase en ese proyecto y su fundamento teórico. Mostraremos como esa ausente conduce a limitaciones para comprender la dinámica concreta del proyecto neodesarrollista, sus barreras y límites. Para ello presentaremos una discusión crítica de los supuestos neoestructuralistas y analizaremos el desempeño empírico del proyecto neodesarrolllista en Argentina. Concluiremos con algunos elementos de lo que podría ser una alternativa desde la perspectiva de la clase trabajadora ; In this article we will analyze the neodevelopmentalist project in Argentina, that begun after the crisis of neoliberalism. We will critically present its political economy foundations that are tied to neoestructuralism. We will discuss the absence of a class perspective in neodevelopmentalism and in its theoretical foundations. We will show how such an absence turns into limitations to comprehend the concrete dynamics of the neodevelopmentalism project, its barriers and limits. To that aim we will present a critical discussion of the neostructuralist suppositions and we will analyze the empirical record of neodevelopmentalism in Argentina. We will conclude with some elements of what might be an alternative from the perspective of the working class ; Fil: Féliz, Mariano. Universidad Nacional de La Plata. Facultad de Humanidades y Ciencias de la Educación. Instituto de Investigaciones en Humanidades y Ciencias Sociales (UNLP-CONICET); Argentina.

En este trabajo analizaremos el proyecto neodesarrollista en Argentina iniciado en 2002, luego de la crisis del neoliberalismo. Presentaremos críticamente sus fundamento de economía política que remiten al neoestructuralismo. Discutiremos la ausencia de una perspectiva de clase en ese proyecto y su fundamento teórico. Mostraremos como esa ausente conduce a limitaciones para comprender la dinámica concreta del proyecto neodesarrollista, sus barreras y límites. Para ello presentaremos una discusión crítica de los supuestos neoestructuralistas y analizaremos el desempeño empírico del proyecto neodesarrolllista en Argentina. Concluiremos con algunos elementos de lo que podría ser una alternativa desde la perspectiva de la clase trabajadora ; In this article we will analyze the neodevelopmentalist project in Argentina, that begun after the crisis of neoliberalism. We will critically present its political economy foundations that are tied to neoestructuralism. We will discuss the absence of a class perspective in neodevelopmentalism and in its theoretical foundations. We will show how such an absence turns into limitations to comprehend the concrete dynamics of the neodevelopmentalism project, its barriers and limits. To that aim we will present a critical discussion of the neostructuralist suppositions and we will analyze the empirical record of neodevelopmentalism in Argentina. We will conclude with some elements of what might be an alternative from the perspective of the working class ; Fil: Féliz, Mariano. Universidad Nacional de La Plata. Facultad de Humanidades y Ciencias de la Educación. Instituto de Investigaciones en Humanidades y Ciencias Sociales (UNLP-CONICET); Argentina.

En este trabajo analizaremos el proyecto neodesarrollista en Argentina iniciado en 2002, luego de la crisis del neoliberalismo. Presentaremos críticamente sus fundamento de economía política que remiten al neoestructuralismo. Discutiremos la ausencia de una perspectiva de clase en ese proyecto y su fundamento teórico. Mostraremos como esa ausente conduce a limitaciones para comprender la dinámica concreta del proyecto neodesarrollista, sus barreras y límites. Para ello presentaremos una discusión crítica de los supuestos neoestructuralistas y analizaremos el desempeño empírico del proyecto neodesarrolllista en Argentina. Concluiremos con algunos elementos de lo que podría ser una alternativa desde la perspectiva de la clase trabajadora ; In this article we will analyze the neodevelopmentalist project in Argentina, that begun after the crisis of neoliberalism. We will critically present its political economy foundations that are tied to neoestructuralism. We will discuss the absence of a class perspective in neodevelopmentalism and in its theoretical foundations. We will show how such an absence turns into limitations to comprehend the concrete dynamics of the neodevelopmentalism project, its barriers and limits. To that aim we will present a critical discussion of the neostructuralist suppositions and we will analyze the empirical record of neodevelopmentalism in Argentina. We will conclude with some elements of what might be an alternative from the perspective of the working class ; Fil: Féliz, Mariano. Universidad Nacional de La Plata. Facultad de Humanidades y Ciencias de la Educación. Instituto de Investigaciones en Humanidades y Ciencias Sociales (UNLP-CONICET); Argentina.

This article explores the relationship between the agrarian and national questions. It is argued that the ambiguities and gaps in the developmental theories after the Second World War have been progressively unveiled by the more successful processes of capitalist development of the twentieth century, which combined sustainable economic growth, reduction of social inequalities and improvement of political institutions with the progressive inclusion of the working masses. The relevance of the relation between the agrarian and the national questions was often obscured in prescriptive theories, but came to be anticipated in some of them, providing heuristic tools for the development of new projects and new utopias. The article interrogates one of these analysts, Fernando Fajnzylber, key ideologue of the neostructuralism in Latin America, with regard to his vision on development, an explicitly knowledge-based one, and much more rural-based than assumed by the old ECLA structuralism.