TLC: los buitres contraatacan (Tema Central)

Este artículo plantea que los TLC se inscriben dentro de una lógica de profundización de la globalización económica y del pensamiento neoliberal, en donde los mercados abiertos, el desmantelamiento del Estado y la reducción del gasto público, entre otras, son las condiciones necesarias para dicha profundización. De acuerdo con el autor los TLC son otra de las estrategias de Estados Unidos frente a la arremetida de los bloques económicos como la Unión Europea y a la lentitud de las negociaciones en la OMC, por lo tanto este tipo de acuerdos solo reedita la misma lógica neo liberal e implica un sometimiento a la geopolítica de Estados Unidos.

V Foro Social Mundial, ¿avance o retroceso? (Otros Temas)

La autora pasa revista a las causas que dieron origen a la realización del Foro Social Mundial y a los que han sido los principales objetivos de este evento en sus cinco ediciones. Igualmente, analiza algunas de las problemáticas que enfrenta tanto la organización como el desarrollo del Foro, haciendo énfasis en los fuertes cuestionamientos que han venido surgiendo en cuanto a los resultados concretos del mismo. De Souza finaliza planteando la necesidad de un cambio radical en cuanto a las alternativas antiimperialistas y antineoliberales.

La renuncia a la equidad y la domesticación de la salud pública

Under present historical conditions of extreme social inequity, sustained by structural impoverishment, the destruction of living conditions and deterioration of environmental integrity, under the logic of big business, and precisely when the people’s organizations are working intensely in defending creatively human rights and health, academic public health evidences an exasperating passiveness; university departments, local and federal government agencies and even non-governmental organizations, keep implementing ineffective and innocuous health programs -some of them sustained by an expensive propaganda apparatus- that reproduce the same conventional plans, most of which end up reinforcing the rules of the neoliberal game. The present paper seeks to explain this historical surrender of public health; the institutional incapacity to foresee the structural roots of that flourishing pathology of inequity; and its divorce from the struggle of the most progressive social organizations. To accomplish this critique of hegemonic public health, the author analyzes the historical and epistemological roots of that “blindness” and the ideological fundaments of that political passiveness.

State Policies, Territories and Rights of Indigenous Peoples in Ecuador (1983-2012)

This work seeks to reconstruct the dynamics of the agreements and disagreements between the State and the indigenous peoples in Ecuador, emphasising particularly on two key elements: first, the indigenous peoples participation and exercise of their political rights, in particular the right to self-government and autonomy within their jurisdictions; and secondly, indigenous peoples’ degree of direct influence on public policies’ formulation and implementation, specially those directly affecting their territories, including the exploitation of natural resources. In Ecuador, during this historical period, the state has gone through three major moments in its relationship with indigenous peoples: neo - indigenism associated to developmentalism (1980-1984); multiculturalism associated to neoliberalism (1984- 2006) as one of the dominant trends over the period; and the crisis of neoliberalism and the search for national diversity and interculturalism associated to post- neoliberalism (2007-2013). Each has had a particular connotation, as to the scope and methods to respond to indigenous demands. In this context, this research aims to answer the central question: how has the Ecuadorian State met the demands of the indigenous movement in the last three decades, and how has it ensured the validity of their gradually recognized rights? And how and to what extent by doing so, it contradicts and alters the existing economic model based on the extraction of primary resources?