Search

El objetivo general del presente artículo consiste en reflexionar acerca de las causas pro-fundas que explican el atraso ancestral de las sociedades latinoamericanas y perfilar una estrategia de salida a dicha problemática. La metodología utilizada consistió en la revisión de un amplio material bibliográfico que permite constatar que el Estado fallido y la socie-dad civil sumisa y diletante, que hoy distingue a la mayoría de los países latinoamericanos, constituyen las dos caras de un mismo círculo vicioso que reproduce el rezago económico y facilita la manipulación ideológica y política del clientelismo depredador. Para enfrentar tales obstáculos estructurales, se recomienda emprender un proceso de cambio que permi-ta impulsar, en forma simultánea y coordinada, la reforma integral del Estado clientelista y la organización autónoma de la gente para que, al convertirse en sujeto colectivo, se movi-lice en pos de la construcción de soluciones innovadoras desde abajo. The general objective of this article is to reflect on the causes that explain the ancestral backwardness of Latin American societies and provide an exit strategy to this problem. The methodology used consisted of reviewing extensive bibliographic material that shows that the failed state and the submissive and dilettante civil society, which today distinguishes most of the Latin American countries, constitute the two sides of the same vicious circle, which reproduces the economic lag and facilitates the ideological and political manipulation of predatory patronage. In order to face such structural obstacles, it is recommended to undertake a process of change that allows promoting, simultaneously and in coordination, the comprehensive reform of the client state and the autonomous organization of the people, so that when they become a collective subject, they mobilize in favor of building innovative solutions from below. Universidad Nacional, Costa Rica Escuela de Planificación y Promoción Social

Development projects are inscribed in concrete relations of power. These relations have multiple dimensions, presenting themselves at almost all levels of a project—between communities and their surroundings, among project beneficiaries, in connection with the conditions and circumstances that the project is attempting to change, among the institutions that participate in the project, and between technical advisers and beneficiaries. Many development projects do not recognize these power relations in their training and implementation regimes, focusing instead on formal institutional relations. Probably because they conceive of the individual as an abstract entity isolated from any social context, they tend to view that individual as an intellectual being rather than as a social being of flesh and bone inscribed in relations of power with certain circumstances of rank, of domination and subordination, of interests, values, and ideas. This approach neglects the relations that order society, defining positions and opportunities and generating and maintaining a system of incentives and punishments directed toward the consolidation of positions, channels of social advancement, values, and behaviors. Not viewing individuals within the power relations that are the basis of social organization makes it impossible to fully understand their motivations or the logic of their behavior toward institutions and their functionaries and toward the various groups and organizations in which they participate. When projects are designed and policies are formulated with the goal of a fair and efficient administration that will avoid clientelism, the assumption is that things will turn out as expected. Existing relations are ignored, overlooking the fact