CONICET | Buscador de Institutos y Recursos Humanos

Se trata de la reunión del Grupo Permanente de Alternativas al Desarrollo, para el cual preparé este articulo sobre el giro conservador en América Latina, que fue luego traducido al inglés y publicado en el sitio web de la Fundación Rosa Luxemburgo.No se trata de un articulo periodístico, sino de un ensayo académico, extenso y bien fundamentado.va la introducción en inglés, el link del sitio web y em pdf, que será publicada en 2020 en un libro que saldrá en MéxicoUntil a few years ago, Latin America represented by progressive governments was thought to be running counter to the radicalization process of neoliberalism now traversing Europe and the United States, with its consequences of increasing inequality, xenophobia, and anti-globalism. Nevertheless, changing ideological winds are sweeping the region. The end of the progressive cycle, at least as we knew it, is now a definitive fact in terms of government, regional alliances, and the climate of the times.The end of the cycle brought with it the decline of progressivism as a lingua franca. The modular elements that distinguished this common language were the questioning of neoliberalism, characteristic of the 1990s; an egalitarian discourse that aimed at social inclusion, especially through social programs and the impetus of consumption; the implementation of heterodox economic policies; and, finally, the aspiration to build a Latin American setting, all of which were necessary for working out regional integration. Undoubtedly, the consolidation of a progressive political hegemony associated with these four modular elements was linked to the boom in international commodity prices.Throughout the progressive cycle (2000?2015) there were those who tended to identify Progressivisms and Lefts more or less automatically. At the national and regional level, however, the clarification of what was understood as ?progressivism? was the object of harsh debates and interpretations from the Lefts, especially with regard to issues involving the conception of social change, the role of social movements, and development strategies?among others. These clashes revealed the growing tension between different decolonizing political narratives, especially between the national-developmentalist and the indigenist narrative, which both had a strong role in the epochal shift; that is, in the questioning of neoliberal hegemony and the opening up of a new political scenario. The developmentalist narrative, updated in terms of neo-extractivism, would end up incorporating other dimensions typical of the populist tradition so deeply rooted in our latitudes, and in time would give rise to a high-intensity popIn an attempt to answer some of these questions, I propose a two-pronged discussion. I will first seek to draw a general picture of the end of the cycle and the shift to the right, through an investigation of the political changes that have occurred, the new governmental alignments, and the collapse of the progressive regional institutionality forged over the last fifteen years; in short, the emergence of new political and business alliances and the new geopolitical challenges.I will then offer a more theoretical, but also more specific explanation of how populisms and their polarizing dynamics opened windows of political opportunity and established new social thresholds. I must clarify, however, that rather than discussing the concept of populism and its multiple interpretations, I want to take as a starting point the definition given above (populism as ambivalence, as a polarizing force, and as a social covenant) to explain the factors that strengthened the visibility and legitimization of conservative values, including authoritarian/reactionary ones. Accordingly, I will analyse how the recursive dynamics unleashed consolidated antagonistic camps and opened up new political opportunities that focused on and strengthened conservative positions, even of a reactionary and authoritarian nature. I also want to account for the type of right-wing forces that characterize the region, establishing differences and similarities between the Neoliberal Right and the Authoritarian Radical Right. Finally, in relation to the spheres of conflict, I will revisit the cases of Brazil and Argentina?two of the countries that spearheaded the ending of the cycle?to give an account, in turn, of this seesawing between the political sphere and the social sphere