Latin American forms of nationalism are predicated on the notion that mestizaje, or race mixture, created a homogeneous national identity, and race did not significantly affect social relations. Notions of mestizaje were prevalent in both state institutions and social relations, producing norms that de-legitimated any discussion of ethno-racial hierarchy or inequality and creating what Anthony Marx calls an "unfertile" soil for ethno-racial social movements. In this paper, I explain Colombia's dramatic shift from color-blind to multicultural nationalism, exemplified in the state's approval of multicultural provisions in the 1991 Political Constitution, and subsequently, the1993 Law of Negritude. Analyzing government archives, civil society documents and newspapers as well as conducting in-depth interviews with key actorsâ”Afro Colombian activists, and intellectuals, I show how nascent Afro-Colombian movements were successful in lobbying for rights despite weak collective identity, political fragmentation, few resources, and stark opposition by policymakers and intellectuals. I found that Afro-Colombian activists gained significant ground precisely because they avoided framing their demands in terms of race. Instead, they adopted an ethno-territorial framing, constructing their claims in terms of ethnicity, or the "right to difference". This case highlights the importance of the framing process in the translation of social movement demands into state policy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]