-
Chapter 4. Constructing Neoliberal Multiculturalism in Chile
- University of Pittsburgh Press
- Chapter
- Additional Information
101 Chapter 4 Constructing Neoliberal Multiculturalism in Chile The Concertación responded to the conflicts with a dual approach. On the one hand, it created programs and policies that responded positively to Mapuche demands that could be construed as related to development or diversity. On the other, it harshly penalized Mapuche actions that favored principles of autonomy, self-governance, and territorial control. This policy response coheres to some degree—although it also diverges in important ways—with what other scholars of indigenous politics in Latin America have dubbed “neoliberal multiculturalism” (Hale 2002, 2004, 2006; Horton 2006; Laurie, Andolina, and Radcliffe 2003; Postero 2004, 2007). Throughout Latin America the shift toward multiculturalism took place as neoliberalism became hegemonic. Indigenous movements are among the strongest social movements in the region, and their goals and logic often directly contrast with those of the neoliberal project. As a result, multiculturalism has become an important means of generating consent for neoliberalism. Still, rights and recognition are granted to the indigenous only insofar as they do not threaten 102 Constructing Neoliberal Multiculturalism in Chile state goals in the global economy. Multicultural policies work well with the neoliberal agenda because they promote cultural recognition without the economic and political redistribution that would lead to greater equality (Hale 2006). All told, neoliberal multiculturalism represents a racial project that does little to challenge racial dominance or neocolonialism as manifest in the political-economic agenda of the state. But neoliberal multiculturalism is about more than a policy agenda. Charles Hale (2004, 17) has linked it to “the creation of subjects who govern themselves in accordance with the logic of globalized capitalism.” One subject position created through neoliberal multiculturalism is the indio permitido, or “authorized Indian”—a term coined by Silvia Rivera Cusicanqui (Hale and Millaman 2006). Hale (2004, 19) notes that, in dialectical fashion, neoliberal multiculturalism constructs another subject position as well: “Governance proactively creates and rewards the indio permitido, while condemning its Other to the racialized spaces of poverty and social exclusion.” Hale (2006) calls this “Other” the insurrecto, or “insurrectionary Indian.” While the “authorized ” Indian readily embraces integrationist policies and participates unquestioningly in government programs, the “insurrectionary” defies the principles of neoliberal multiculturalism by pursuing recognition of ancestral rights and redistribution of power and resources. These subject positions are a resource that allows the state to constrain indigenous behavior; communities or individuals who do not adhere to the “authorized” model are marginalized at best or subjected to state violence at worst. These positions do not capture the full range of behaviors and attitudes of indigenous peoples, of course, but their dichotomous character is part of their power; individuals and communities who seek inclusion while also making ancestral claims walk a fine line between acceptance and marginalization (Park and Richards 2007). As the Concertación was committed to promoting democracy and human rights as well as neoliberal growth, the years it held the presidency present a unique opportunity to observe the contradictions inherent in the neoliberal multicultural model. In Chile the “authorized” position describes an ideal Mapuche subject who accepts his or her role in fostering diversity and appreciation for Chile’s folkloric past, does not make demands that exceed state-sponsored multiculturalism, and actively promotes the intercultural policies it entails. The authorized Indian serves to reinforce what the insurrectionary is not, prescribes what she or he should be, and denies the possibility that an individual could embody aspects of both—for example, participating in cultural initiatives and taking advantage of government programs while simultaneously supporting autonomist efforts (Richards 2007). [44.200.49.193] Project MUSE (2024-03-29 16:53 GMT) Constructing Neoliberal Multiculturalism in Chile 103 The transnationally informed set of discourses and practices that we call neoliberal multiculturalism became the prevailing form of governmentality under the Concertación. However, its scope was somewhat more limited than elsewhere in Latin America. The contours of neoliberal multiculturalism under the Concertación responded to the particularities of Chilean history, demands made by the Mapuche movement since the return to democracy, and the conflicts that brewed from the mid-1990s forward. Here I delineate the Concertación’s response to the conflicts, which involved repression on the one hand, and addressing in a limited fashion some indigenous demands on the other. The punitive aspect of this response involved actively constructing the Mapuche not just as insurrectionists but as terrorists. The indigenous policies implemented by the Concertación over the twenty years it was in power included growing attention to interculturality...