The Misadventures of Latin American Marxism. Intellectual Journeys
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Goldsmiths, University of London The Misadventures of Latin American Marxism. Intellectual Journeys Towards the Deprovincialization of Marxist Thought Felipe Lagos Rojas Submitted for the degree of Doctor in Sociology November 2016 This thesis was funded by the Comisión Nacional de Investigación Científica y Tecnológica, Ministerio de Educación, Chile. 2 Declaration I, Felipe Lagos Rojas, declare that this thesis is all my own work. Date: 01/11/2016 3 Abstract This work revisits some trajectories of Marxism in Latin America characterized by their non-official or critical stance vis-à-vis official versions of Marxism, in order to trace and reconstruct a number of attempts to produce a distinctive ‘Latin American Marxism’. The theoretical framework of the thesis draws upon the conceptual achievements of the authors and currents revisited, based (sometimes wittingly and explicitly, sometimes not) on the categories of uneven and combined development, plural temporalities, and translation. Chapter I organizes the conceptual framework that accompanies the reconstruction, in which the common ground of the selected authors lies in to put into question the developmentalist and modernization apparatus that characterized official Marxism during the 20th century. Chapter II and III reconstruct the work of Peruvian José Carlos Mariátegui, considered as the foremost translation of Marxism into a communal-popular perspective with roots in the Andean indigenous community or ayllu. Chapter II focuses on the centrality of ‘uneven and combined development’ in his confrontation to both the homogeneizing perspective of the Second International and the theoretical ‘exceptionalism’ claimed by Haya de la Torre for Latin America. Chapter III continues the reconstruction of Mariátegui’s Marxism in a different yet related register, namely through the incorporation of the notion of ‘myth’. The notion appears as a keystone to comprehend Mariátegui’s incorporation of the Andean ethno-cultural memories in the conceptual registers of historical materialism. Chapter IV to VI address some reflections on the concomitances and tensions between Marxism and the ‘national-popular’ in Latin America. Chapter IV revisits the so-called dependency theory, a heterogeneous ‘school’ which questioned the assumptions of modernization theories and desarrollista frameworks. The chapter evaluates the extent to which the dependency school was able to disengage itself from the notion of development, from a geopolitically-located conceptualization of the capitalist world structure. Chapter V revisits the work of Argentinean Marxist José Aricó, in particular his reading of the ‘misencounter’ (desencuentro) between Marx and Latin America in the midst of the ‘crisis of Marxism’ during the 1970s and 4 ‘80s. The chapter argues that the notion of ‘misencounter’ can be read from the logic of uneven and combined development and its effects in the development of Marxist theory in the sub-continent. Chapter VI, finally, reconstructs the Marxism of Bolivian René Zavaleta Mercado, focusing on the characterization of Bolivia as ‘motley’ society (sociedad abigarrada), and the different temporalities that feature so defined social structures. In his attempt to produce local knowledge, Zavaleta envisaged a theoretical encounter between the working class and the indigenous movements in the midst of the question of democracy. 5 Acknowledgments To the memory of Guido Lagos Garay Over the course of the last five years, I have received the support of many people, in written as well as in person. They have accompanied, inspired, challenged, and encouraged the arguments made herein. Their conversations as well as the challenges they have put on my arguments have considerably helped me develop my own thoughts. More importantly, they have provided me a veritable terrain wherein a strong engagement with the subalterns is possible by translational means. To these friends, colleagues, and comrades: this work is for you. Firstly, I would like to thank my supervisor, Alberto Toscano, for his friendship, wise inspiration, and generous guidance during the writing of this thesis. Without his constant support, this thesis would not be possible, not only because of the partnership of our conversations, which combined firm criticism and definite comradeship, but especially for his advocacy and enthusiasm when my own scepticism about the task came to the fore. I am also indebted to other Goldsmiths staff members for their readiness to build an amazing scholar environment, especially to Vikki Bell, Mónica Greco, Marsha Rosengarten, Sanjay Seth, and Bridget Ward. I am also grateful to those people who helped and oriented me at different levels in my research. First and foremost, throughout this time John Kraniauskas supported me with his friendship, reading and commenting some drafts as well as suggesting alternative viewpoints and literature to my own argument. Furthermore, we have embarked together in exiting projects for developing the contents and consequences of Latin American Marxism. Along with him, I have found the generous backing of friends all over the world, to whom I want to extend my heartfelt thanks: Omar Acha, Luis Andueza, Gavin Arnall, José Tomás Atria, Peter Baker, Daniel Chernilo, Irina Feldman, Pierina Ferretti, Anne Freeland, Juan Grigera, Sara Beatriz Guardia, Jim Kaufman, Paula Mena, Massimo Modonesi, Patricio Olivera, Felipe Palma, César Pérez, Raúl Prada, Ismael Puga, José Borges 6 Reis, Grínor Rojo, Luis Tapia, Horacio Tarcus, José Luis Saavedra, Alicia Salomone, Martín Savransky, Nicolás del Valle, Sergio Villalobos-Ruminott, and Gareth Williams. The Tokyo Foundation, by means of the Sylff Program, honoured me with the SRA award to do fieldwork in Mexico, Buenos Aires, Lima, and La Paz. I wish to thank the Foundation for this support. In these places, I received large and crucial support from Carlos Azócar, Nair Castillo, Úrsula Indacochea, Mauricio Miranda, Cecilia Jaramillo, Evelyn Palma, Cristian Pozo, and Ariadna Soto. This research also benefited by the support of the 2015 Ibero-American Institute Grant, which allowed me to spend a writing-up period in Berlin. In this city, I once again found a kind of complicit partnership for which I am thankful to Pablo Faúndez, Ana María Ledezma and family, Claudia Maldonado, Emilio Martínez, and Álvaro Recabarren. These 5 years in London were also a time for building new commitments in both theory and practice. To the participants of the Capital reading group: Pancha, Lucho, Claudio, Nico, Paz, Alicia, Miguel, Mijail; to the members of the Goldsmiths Latin American Hub: Lieta, Valentina, Rosario, Felipe; to all my enthusiastic comrades in the London-Chile Solidarity Group; and to the participants of the stream ‘Latin American Marxisms’ in the Historical Materialism Conference – thank you so much! The love, support, and patience of my family and friends from Chile have been invaluable to generate the material and emotional conditions for this kind of work. I am lifelong thankful to my parents, Osvaldo and Kenna, my siblings Cristian, María Paz, Carlos and Valentina, my nephews Maximiliano and Vicente, and my grandmother Telma. My special thanks to Carla, Gustavo, Bernardita, Natalia, Benja, Javiera S., Nico C., Javiera M., Tomas, Marta, Lore, Marcelo, Jorge, Jocelyn, Inês, Camilo A., Lavinia, Camilo S., Kat, Ignacio, Catalina, Nico L., Papo, Mariana, Juan José, Miranda, Raúl, and Rayen. Last but by no means least, the final part of this work coincided with the appearance of Francisca in my life, an encounter that transformed everything for good; she marked the more meaningful difference between walking, thinking, and 7 fighting for, and walking, thinking, and fighting for with. This thesis is dedicated to her. 8 Table of Contents Introduction. Marxism in/from Latin America: Difficulties and Engagements ........ 11 I. Conceptual Paths in the Deprovincialization of Marxism .................................... 25 1. On Marxism and its Ongoing Crisis ..................................................................... 25 2. Towards a Subalternist Hypothesis ...................................................................... 28 3. Marx and the Critique of Capital’s Tempo .......................................................... 34 4. The Uneven and Combined Development of Capitalist Modernity ............... 39 5. Translation and the Task of the Materialist Historian ....................................... 45 6. Towards ‘Latin American Marxism’ .................................................................... 52 II. Uneven and Combined Development in Mariátegui’s ‘National’ Marxism ....... 54 1. Some Notes on the Inception of Marxism in Latin America ............................. 54 2. Mariátegui and ‘Leninism’ ..................................................................................... 58 3. Peru’s Primary Problem ......................................................................................... 64 4. Haya and Mariátegui: On the Rhythms of Capitalist Development ............... 77 5. Uneven and Combined Development and the National Question Reframed ... ................................................................................................................................... 88 III. The Work of Myth and Memory in Mariátegui’s Marxism................................... 93 1. Marxism and Irrationalism: Mariátegui and his Readers ................................. 93 2. The Presence of Sorel and Bergson in Mariátegui’s