Search

In this paper we present a categorization of autonomies implemented by indigenous and peasant movements in Latin America into three types: a) juridical versus de facto autonomies; b) explicit versus implicit autonomies; and c) (mono)ethnic versus popular or class-based autonomies. We argue that the debate concerning these different conceptions is of strategic importance both in the dialogue between indigenous and peasant struggles for the defense of territories, and in the question of peasant autonomy, understood as a strategy of struggle. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Aposta is the property of Aposta and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The legacy of the 1917 Russian Revolution for the melting pot of Latin American and Caribbean historical resistance is undeniable, especially with regard to the revolutions that began in the mid-twentieth century. The present paper offers some elements for a theoretical and historical-political re-reading of the Russian Soviet Revolution through the lens of the social struggles of the end of the century, in particular those articulated by social movements, in this case, the Zapatista Movement of Mexico. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]