Unsettling Statecraft: Democracy and Neoliberalism in the Central Andes. by Catherine M. Conaghan; James M.

Malloy Review by: Miguel Centeno American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 101, No. 5 (Mar., 1996), pp. 1476-1478 Published by: The University of Chicago Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2782390 . Accessed: 01/04/2014 23:15
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

The University of Chicago Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to American Journal of Sociology.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 168.176.5.118 on Tue, 1 Apr 2014 23:15:42 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

American Journal of Sociology demystification slights theinstitutional contexts, interests, and organizational linkagesthat framedevelopment along the lines of PierreBourdieu's "fieldsof knowledge"(Homo Academicus[PolityPress, 1988]) or MargaretSomers'sproposalin "The NarrativeConstruction of Identity: A Relational and NetworkApproach"(Theoryand Society 23 [1994]: ofan exclusively 605-49). The limits discursive method becomeapparent in the Colombiancase. The makingof the "agrarianquestion"sincethe 1970s, would have been further revealedby a dense analysisof career and clientagesof development trajectories, education,funding, professionals. Moreover,Escobar hardly mentions but failsto fully contextualize these debates withinthe largerhistory of rural protestand official responsesthatreach back to the GreatDepression. of relationships Such absenceslimitthediscernment betweendevelopmentas discourse and itsstructural and institutional manifestations from the international to thelocal levels. And thereare politicalimplications. Escobar rightly alerts us to the "indignity of speakingfor others"(p. 242). Yet it mightbe unseemly too that dissidentintellectuals provide to development withless than efficacious thoseconstructing alternatives in tools to discard or remakesocietyon theirown terms.Nonetheless, the culturalcritique-and politicsthe end, thoughhardlysufficient, proposedin thispenetrating book are crucialin theseperiloustimes. in the CentralAnUnsettling Statecraft: Democracyand Neoliberalism des. By Catherine M. Conaghanand JamesM. Malloy. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, 1995. Pp. xii+303. $49.95 (cloth); $22.95 (paper). Miguel Centeno PrincetonUniversity Bolivia would appear to be a veryunlikely place to finda solution to the in a democracy. draconianeconomicreform dilemmaposed by imposing Yet, one of the conclusionsfromthis verygood book is that precisely because Bolivia was such an economic,political,and social basketcase, the government of Paz Estenssorowas able to momentarily navigate rescuetheBolivian betweentheconflicting social groupsand successfully and likelycollapse. In 1985, official inflaeconomyfromhyperinflation tion was 11,749%, per capita GDP was in its sixthstraight year of decline,thegovernment was almost100% financed and the through deficit, country owed more moneythan it could generatein a singleyear. By 1989, inflation was down to 16.6%, public deficits were down to below Western was growing once again. Of European levels,and theeconomy course,notall sharedin thecelebration. The mainmining parastatalhad shed over 80% of its jobs, and the average monthly wage was down to was able to hand powerto his dulyelected U.S. $25. Yet Paz Estenssoro successor(via some deals in the legislature). 1476

This content downloaded from 168.176.5.118 on Tue, 1 Apr 2014 23:15:42 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Book Reviews How Bolivia did it and its neighbors did not is the centralnarrative of Unsettling Statecraft. Beginning withtherequisite reviewoftheliterature on transitions, Conaghan and Malloy go on to explorethe "why and how certainchoices were made" (p. 11) in Peru, Ecuador, and Bolivia duringthe 1980s. All threecountries had recently emerged from military rule,all had democratically electedgovernments, all triedsome versionof the neoliberalparadigmof slimmer budgets,tighter credits, and open markets. Explainingtheconditions thatled to democratic austerity and thereasonsforitssuccessand failure are thegoals ofthebook. The authors are perfectly qualified forthistask.Malloyhas beenstudying Bolivia since the 1960s and was one of the fathers of the studyof the "new" authoritarianism of the 1970s. Conaghan has previouslypublished a book on Ecuador and done extensivework on policy-making elites. Avoiding the temptations of simplisticmodels, deterministic causes, and culturalchauvinism, theyhave produceda greatstorythat can teachus a good deal about therelations betweenpolitics and markets as well as the likelylimitson democracy in the "new world order." Following an elegant historicalsummary of the regionprior to the 1970s,theauthorsdescribethefailures of themilitary regimes. Not only did thesefailto generate growth; theyalso managedto alienateall potential social allies. This failure producedan antistatist allianceofconservative politicians,technocrats,and domestic capital. The firstgroup wanted to returnto power, the second was obsessed with getting the prices right,and the thirdwas sick of being ignoredby the generals. Business elites realized that they could exercisemuch more influence thanthrough through democratic politics allianceswiththemilitary. One of the mostusefulfindings of thisbook is disassociating and democracy populistallies: in the cases at hand, these appeared to have mattered back elections. little.It was capital thatbrought the analyses of the fates of the neoliberal Perhaps more important, in all threecountries also disprovethe stillpopular notion experiments forthe collapse of "sound" economicpolithatthe poor are responsible wereconcerned withpopucies. Whileall threedemocratic governments to buyingvotes lar demonstrations, theyappeared to pay littleattention were prohibited economics.All threepresidents through "soft-budget" in buildingfuturesupportfor a fromreelection, none was interested party, and all could (and did) disregardthe legislatureswhen they couldnotdisregard was domestic it appropriate. Whatthey thought capital whose "rational[self-seeking] behaviorin the marketplacehad destructive macro-economic effects" (p. 182). Capital flight, pricegouging, and excess consumption killed neoliberalism, speculativeinvestments, If anything, theeconomicpolnotexcesswages and electoral pandering. were too and insulated;the technocrats icy circleswere too autonomous whilenotattentive to politicalworkand institucertainof theirtheories tionbuilding. So, whyand how did Bolivia do it? First,Paz Estenssorowas politiof his participation in cally adroitand also anointedby the legitimacy 1477

This content downloaded from 168.176.5.118 on Tue, 1 Apr 2014 23:15:42 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

American Journal of Sociology Second, the "Bolivian miracle"was bloodierthan the 1952 revolution. manyadmit. Third, Bolivia did not pay its debt but was not punished. unaffected by governand drugsectors werelargely Fourth,theinformal net. Fifth,giventhatbusimentpolicyand providedan economicsafety ness had alreadyflownfromBolivia in the 1970s, it could not exercise may its veto and derail key pointsof the plan. While thesecomponents transition model,theymake and marketable not make foran attractive forverygood social science.They do not,however,make one veryoptiand political to thecentral dilemmaofgrowth mistic about theresolution The finalmessageof the book is that neoliberalism may participation. withoutgeneralssimplybecause democracyhas been so contriumph strained.Politicshas been made safe formarkets. Of course, the book has some weaknesses. Capital is too oftendedue exploration of various factions scribedas a collectiveactorwithout and interests. The authorsdo notfully possibiliexploitthecomparative ties of theirthreecases. The human and social costs of the policiesare barely addressed. The social, political,and economicheightsare well what is goingon in the streets.At explored,but one keeps wondering timesthedetailofthenarrative getsin theway oftheanalysis.Neverthethisis a verywelcome fieldof "transitology," less, in theever expanding addition. of Machismo: Evangelical Conversionand Genderin The Reformation of Texas Press, Colombia. By Elizabeth E. Brusco. Austin:University 1995. Pp. xx+ 203. $35.00 (cloth);$14.95 (paper). Kevin Neuhouser University of Washington of What are theimplications Protestant. Latin Americais fastbecoming forwomen?Is Protestantism an agentof NorthAmerican thistransition machismo?Elizabeth E. Brusco or a means of challenging patriarchy in Colombia is transmakes the case that Evangelical Protestantism in ways thatbenefit women.In fact,she states forming genderrelations is a "'strategic' women'smovement, like thatEvangelical Protestantism because it servesto reform genderrolesin a way that Western feminism, enhancesfemalestatus"(p. 6). Unlike the Westernfeminist movement, however,Colombian Evanin does not directly women'sparticipation promote gelicalProtestantism it male spheres ofpaid workand politics indirectly (though thetraditional increasedfemaleeducation).Instead, Evangelicalism maydo so through in the femalesphere men's participation benefits women by promoting in thefammale involvement offamily and household.Although greater ily mightreducewomen'spowerin the one arena wheretheyhad tradiheld it, Brusco arguesthatthisis not the case. tionally 1478

This content downloaded from 168.176.5.118 on Tue, 1 Apr 2014 23:15:42 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions