State Governance and Micropractices of Power in the Process of Decolonizing the State in Bolivia

Abstract

This article investigates how multiple and nuanced micropractices of power work through everyday bureaucratic actions in the course of major state transformations. It argues that it is not solely the grand ideological battles or global asymmetries of power that impede the implementation of revolutionary political alternatives. More attention should be paid to the internal functioning of state governance and its micropractices of power in processes of change. Empirically, it examines the process of decolonizing the state in Bolivia, where the notion of vivir bien (living well) has been introduced into policy-making processes since 2006. Initially, it was portrayed as a democratizing and decolonizing policy alternative deriving-to an extent-from indigenous cultural heritage that provides locally grounded solutions to societal problems. While many of the outcomes of the shift in public policy have been critically assessed, there is still a lack in showing how difficulties in implementation emerge. By discussing the contested nature of everyday bureaucratic practices in Evo Morales' Bolivia, this article tries to fulfill the gap. It is demonstrated here that multiple everyday techniques, procedures, and routines of the state continue to create and reproduce various forms of coloniality. The ethnographic evidence of the continuation of neoliberal rationalities suggests that it is these exact-and assumingly insignificantbureaucratic routines that derogate vivir bien transformation agenda internally. Consequently, together with opposition and outright racism by public servants, it is shown that deep ruptures have emerged between political rhetoric of decolonization and concrete everyday actions amidst state bureaucracy.

Nascent activism in times of disillusionment: struggles between Indigenous self-determination and state co-optation in plurinational Bolivia

“…When the notion of vivir bien became Bolivian state policy in 2006, some members of the Indigenous network with which I engaged became parliamentarians and policy advisors for the MAS. Meanwhile, I started a PhD project to contribute to and accompany the process with critical and engaged knowledge production (Hutchings & Holcombe, 2022), discussing the potentials and possible dangers of translating Indigenous life philosophies, such as sumak kawsay, into state policies (Ranta, 2018a). While I lived in rural Indigenous communities in 2001 with the consent of the respective Indigenous authorities, I have primarily conducted my subsequent research periods in 2018, 2020, and 2022, as well as long-term ethnographic work, 2008–2009, in state institutions and with urban Indigenous scholars and activists, with their oral consent.…”

Puppeteering as a metaphor for unpacking power in participatory action research on climate change and health

“…In many collaborations and contexts, the modern 'professional' represents a dominant social class or ethnicity (e.g. Mitlin, 2013;Ranta, 2018). The professionals prescribe the human needs of others, such as those related to health, and cater to them (Illich, 1978).…”