Del estado pluricultural y multiétnico (1998) al estado plurinacional e intercultural (2008): “comunidades (no) imaginadas”, etnicidad y poder
The current essay is a debate-promoting document aimed to enrich such debate, gathering the most up-to-date references from those who have reflected upon in academic areas, as well as in political and social actions. The main question to be answered is linked to what have been the contextual c...
| Autor Principal: | Cahuasquí Cevallos, Santiago Manuel |
|---|---|
| Formato: | bachelorThesis |
| Idioma: | spa |
| Publicado: |
2017
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: |
http://dspace.ups.edu.ec/handle/123456789/14225 |
| Etiquetas: |
Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
|
| Sumario: |
The current essay is a debate-promoting document aimed to enrich such debate,
gathering the most up-to-date references from those who have reflected upon in
academic areas, as well as in political and social actions. The main question to be
answered is linked to what have been the contextual characteristics of Ecuador’s
cultural diversity management models in its construction process as an ‘imagined
community.’ For that, the reference used is the way in which the 1998 and 2008
Constitutions have defined the State as ‘pluricultural and multiethnic’ and
‘intercultural and plurinational’, respectively.
The objectives of this research are: (1) to analyze the accumulated resistance
and insurgency of indigenous and Afro-descendant peoples, until their constitution as
historical and political subjects; (2) to perform a conceptual approach to
multiculturalism, multiculturalism and interculturality; and, (3) to establish the
fundamental differences between the monocultural and uninational State; and the
intercultural and plurinational State.
The essay consists of three sections. The first comprises a brief look over the
cumulus of resistances and insurgencies from the indigenous movement, starting in the
Colony period until the 1990 uprising. The second section aims to explore the
conceptual differences between pluriculturality and multiculturalism as State methods
of managing cultural diversity. It also addresses the ‘imagined community’ category
to substantiate why the nation is a cultural artifact—rather than an ideology—where
the sense of Ecuadorian belonging is devised and enounced. The third section debates
to what extent the State is acknowledged as plurinational.
In the methodological aspect, the foundation was the bibliographical research,
complemented qualitatively with the development of fieldwork through interviews
with relevant actors of the indigenous world. In this way, this research sought to collect
the own points of view of the social actors and such of their universes of meanings.
The main conclusion is that the concepts of interculturality and plurinationality
are part of a political dispute over the control of meanings and senses that fluctuate
between usurpation and symbolic insurgency. However, exclusion, domination and
violence have been the main characteristic of the models of management of diversity
by the State, as well as of the conformation of the nation as an "imagined community". |
|---|