Authoritarian Populism and the Rural World

Guest Issue Editors: Sergio Coronado, Lyda Fernanda Forero and Daniela Andrade

This Special Issue is part of a global agenda launched in 2018 by the Emancipatory Rural Politics Initiative (ERPI).[1] ERPI is a broad research collective, which seeks to understand the rise of ‘authoritarian populism’ in different parts of the world and its relations with the rural context. While many populist leaders cultivate their bases in such settings, the countryside is also a rich site of struggle and alternative politics.

In the past years, the world has watched a sway of right-wing, exclusionary and regressive politics, yet backed by widespread popular support. After more than a decade of the so-called Pink Tide governments in Latin America and the Caribbean – know for the promotion of developmentalism, economic growth, increased equity and social progress – the region has also fallen into the global trend in multiple yet diverse cases. Countries like Venezuela and Nicaragua are examples of a left-leaning government that have been accused of assuming an authoritarian character. In Honduras, Brazil and Paraguay, democratically elected presidents have been ousted in soft coups and substituted by right-wing governments and socially regressive political projects. In Colombia, politics moved even further to the right and in Guatemala, to social and economic conservatism. In both cases, the political shift was endorsed by democratic elections.

In all these economic and political changes, the rural context is particularly relevant to grasp. It is well known that agriculture and the extractive industry have played an important albeit ambiguous role in economic and political trends in the region during the last decade. Taking advantage of the high commodity price and demand in the world market, left-leaning governments relied on the export revenue accrued from agriculture and natural resources extraction to promote economic growth and social policies that provided welfare to the poor. In many cases, that implied a state-sponsorship of agrarian and rentier elites, besides modest redistributive reforms. As a consequence, the rural population, which represented an important electoral base of Pink Tide governments, has benefited from a series of progressive policies, but also been harmed and threatened by agricultural and mining expansion or developmentalism projects for infrastructure. For that reason, the rural context has also represented an important base of organized resistance and emancipatory politics.

Today, the region is confronted with economic, social and political crises. Right-wing politics and ideologies gained space and once again, the rural context is at stake. That is seen either in the championing of agribusiness and resource exploitation, the denial of environmental concerns, including in some cases direct warfare against indigenous people, rural leaders and agrarian movements. Assaults against constitutional institutions, repression and coercion of the organized political opposition are expressions of ‘authoritarian populism’.

In face of complex, controversial and rapidly changing economic and political scenario, some reflections are still missing. This LAP Special Issue aims at forming a better understanding of whether and how the rural setting is affected by, contributes to or reacts to authoritarian populism. As such, we reinforce the ERPI effort in creating scholarship and movement building around populism and emancipatory politics. Below, we listed three clusters of questions we are interested in but not confined to.

Understanding authoritarian populism and its rural links (roots and effects)

• To which extent do the recent economic and political changes in the region cast a shadow over the progressiveness of the Pink Tide governments, particularly in relation to the rural setting?
• What are the links between the reportedly progressive and popular politics of the past and the increasingly authoritarian and socially regressive politics of today?
• The left-oriented governments that emerged in the late 1990s and early 2000s in LA have been associated with populism or neo-populism, although with very different and conflicting connotations. From the perspective of the rural people, were these governments populist? Why and in which basis?
• How to make sense of populism in face of the recent history in Latin America? What are the particular forms by which populism and or authoritarianism are currently manifested in rural areas?
• Latin America is facing economic, social and political crises. In which ways has the extractivist pattern of development conditioned or contributed to the crises?
• Do the social setbacks in rural areas reflect a return of neoliberal politics or their continuation?
• What are the economic, social and environmental implications for the future of rural development if ‘authoritarian populism’ – or other manifestations of regressive politics – continues to spread and deepen in the region?

Resistance, mobilization and emancipatory politics

• In face of ambiguous relations with past politics, how have the organized resistance and their rural social base positioned themselves in relation to current politics? With whom they have allied with and on which basis? Do they have an emancipatory agenda or they expect the return of the (populist?) leaders and politics of the past? Were their contestations and expressions of resistance emancipatory before?
• What have been the relations and effects over agrarian social movements and grassroots initiatives of the partial incorporation of their demands and discourse into the political practice of the Pink Tide governments? Have these progressive and popular governments stimulated or stalled social and political activism in rural areas? Were rural social basis strengthen or weakened in their forms of organization, economic and social reproduction?

Understanding, creating, supporting and scaling up alternatives

• What are the lessons to be learned? How to move forward?
• How rural based movements understand their political role in the current moment? What is their understanding of current and future struggles? Which alternatives they present? How can they be supported and expanded?

We do not offer a particular definition of populism. Instead, we encourage different but well-substantiated views and approaches that can contribute to a collective reflection and critical understanding of the current expressions of such a phenomenon, as well as help to take advantage of the political opportunities to foster political action and transformative politics.

Finally, we very much welcome the contribution of scholars, activists, practitioners and policymakers. We welcome the contribution of social movements in the form of interview or academic article.

Issue Editor Contact Information:

Sergio Coronado: sergioandrescoronado@gmail.com
Lyda Fernanda Forero: lydafernanda@tni.org
Daniela Andrade: daniela andrade <dani@br1.us>

For submission information, please visit http://latinamericanperspectives.com/submitting-manuscripts/

[1] The ERPI is coordinated by Ian Scoones (IDS – University of Sussex), Ruth Hall (PLAAS – University of Western Cape), Marc Edelman (CUNY), Wendy Wolford (Cornell University), Saturnino ‘Jun’ Borras and Ben White (ISS), Jennifer Franco and Lyda Forero (TNI). More info at: https://www.iss.nl/en/research/networks/emancipatory-rural-politics-initiative-erpi