DIREITOS CULTURAIS, DIVERSIDADE CULTURAL E O ESTADO: liberalismo monocultural, multiculturalismo liberal e inteculturalismo radical

Cultural rights aim to protect the legitimate interests of cultural minorities. Cultural rights are one of the primary instruments that contemporary States have to recognize and accommodate cultural minorities. This article seeks to describe and analyze the constitutive elements of cultural rights, their fundamentals, and the constitutional models they are immersed in. To meet this objective, the article is divided into three parts. In the first, I examine the monocultural liberal constitutional model. This model does not accept cultural rights, but it is the primary theoretical and practical adversary of the constitutional models that do. In the second part, I analyze the multicultural liberal constitutional model. This is the model within which "classic" cultural rights such as the right to cultural integrity, cultural minorities' right to self-government, and the right to prior consultation arise and are founded. In the third and last part, I explore the radical intercultural constitutional model that reinterprets the role that cultural rights must play within a multicultural State, creates new cultural principles and rights, and reimagines the structure that a multicultural State should have.Los derechos culturales tienen como objetivo proteger los intereses legítimos de las minorías culturales. Este artículo tiene como objetivo describir y analizar los elementos constitutivos de los derechos culturales, sus fundamentos y los modelos constitucionales en los que se insertan. Para cumplir con este objetivo, el texto se divide en tres partes. En la primera, examino el modelo constitucional liberal monocultural. Este modelo no acepta los derechos culturales, pero es el principal adversario teórico y práctico de los modelos constitucionales que si lo hacen. En la segunda parte, analizo el modelo constitucional liberal multicultural. Este es el modelo dentro del cual surgen y se fundamentan los derechos culturales “clásicos”, por ejemplo, el derecho a la integridad de la cultura, el derecho al autogobierno de las minorías culturales y el derecho a la consulta previa. En esta misma sección examino quiénes son los titulares de los derechos culturales, los bienes que pueden ser protegidos mediante estos derechos, sus fundamentos y las críticas que los cuestionan. En la tercera y última parte, exploro el modelo constitucional intercultural radical que reinterpreta el papel que deben desempeñar los derechos culturales dentro de un Estado multicultural, crea nuevos principios y derechos culturales y reimagina la estructura que deben tener este tipo de Estados.Os direitos culturais visam proteger os interesses legítimos das minorias culturais. Este artigo tem como objetivo descrever e analisar os elementos constitutivos dos direitos culturais, seus fundamentos e os modelos constitucionais nos quais estão inseridos. Para atender a esse objetivo, o texto está dividido em três partes. No primeiro, examino o modelo constitucional liberal monocultural. Este modelo não aceita direitos culturais, mas é o principal adversário teórico e prático dos modelos constitucionais que o fazem. Na segunda parte, analiso o modelo constitucional liberal multicultural. Este é o modelo no qual os direitos culturais “clássicos” emergem e se baseiam, por exemplo, o direito à integridade cultural, o direito ao autogoverno das minorias culturais e o direito a consulta prévia. Nesta mesma seção examino quem são os titulares dos direitos culturais, os bens que podem ser protegidos por meio desses direitos, seus fundamentos e as críticas que os questionam. Na terceira e última parte, exploro o modelo constitucional intercultural radical que reinterpreta o papel que os direitos culturais devem desempenhar dentro de um estado multicultural, cria novos princípios e direitos culturais e reimagina a estrutura que esses tipos de estado deveriam ter

Introduction

The papers gathered in this volume analyze access to justice in Latin America, Europe, and North America from a philosophical, legal, and sociological perspective. In these three regions of the world, as in the rest of the globe, liberal democracies face a troubling gap between the normative and the descriptive: the access to justice promises made by the legal and political system are not fully realized in practice. The studies collected here, therefore, share two baseline assumptions. First, the right of access to justice is fundamental in a liberal state. Access to justice ensures that citizens are able to defend their interests in court and achieve full inclusion in the political community. Access to justice, as argued by social contract theory, is at the core of liberal democracies\u27 normative projects. In the liberal democracies studied in this special issue-as in all others influenced by the post-Enlightenment modern project-contractualism and its commitment to access to justice is part of the of theoretical toolbox used to constitute and legitimize the political community. For all of these liberal democracies, access to justice is necessary for achieving peace and prosperity, and for the full inclusion of all citizens in the polity. Second, the papers gathered in this volume agree that epistemological, socioeconomic, and legal market disparities obstruct the materialization of the right that citizens have to access courts and the administration to solve their conflicts. The key objectives pursued by liberal democracies cannot be fully realized because of poverty and inequality. Both variables have a causal relationship with the access to justice deficits faced by the countries studied in this special issue

Access to Justice: Theory and Practice from a Comparative Perspective

The papers gathered in this volume analyze access to justice in Latin America, Europe, and North America from a philosophical, legal, and sociological perspective. In these three regions of the world, as in the rest of the globe, liberal democracies face a troubling gap between the normative and the descriptive: the access to justice promises made by the legal and political system are not fully realized in practice. The studies collected here, therefore, share two baseline assumptions. First, the right of access to justice is fundamental in a liberal state. Access to justice ensures that citizens are able to defend their interests in court and achieve full inclusion in the political community. Access to justice, as argued by social contract theory, is at the core of liberal democracies\u27 normative projects. In the liberal democracies studied in this special issue - as in all others influenced by the post-Enlightenment modern project - contractualism and its commitment to access to justice is part of the of theoretical toolbox used to constitute and legitimize the political community. For all of these liberal democracies, access to justice is necessary for achieving peace and prosperity, and for the full inclusion of all citizens in the polity. Second, the papers gathered in this volume agree that epistemological, socioeconomic, and legal market disparities obstruct the materialization of the right that citizens have to access courts and the administration to solve their conflicts. The key objectives pursued by liberal democracies cannot be fully realized because of poverty and inequality. Both variables have a causal relationship with the access to justice deficits faced by the countries studied in this special issue

El constitucionalismo radical ambiental y la diversidad cultural en América Latina. Los derechos de la naturaleza y el buen vivir en Ecuador y Bolivia

The Ecuadorian and Bolivian multicultural and environmental constitutions are structured around the following three elements: the principles of plurinationality and interculturality; the rights of nature; and the principle of buen vivir. These three elements are innovatively articulated and creatively linked in these two political charters. No other modern constitution has included and connected this set of principles and rights and has given such an important place to indigenous groups’ epistemologies. These rights and principles constitute an imaginative contribution to the global discussion on cultural diversity, human rights, and the environment. They question the dominant political economy of legal knowledge that a priori considers the Global South as a poor context for the creation of valuable legal products. The contributions of the Ecuadorian and Bolivian constitutions, however, are not completely original, as some of their creators and promoters have stated. These innovations are variations constructed within the grammar of modern constitutionalism, e.g., reinterpretations of the concepts of nation, people, and culture. Some others, though, can be understood as starting from but going beyond the grammar of modern constitutionalism, e.g., the principle of buen vivir. This article describes and analyzes the three components of the Bolivian and Ecuadorian multicultural and environmental constitutions. First, it analyzes the idea that indigenous communities should be recognized as nations and the idea that the polity should be constructed through the interaction among its various cultural communities. The article then explores the Andean indigenous communities’ traditional ways of thinking about nature and its connections to the modern concept of rights. More precisely, it explores the idea that nature is a subject of rights. Finally, the article examines the way in which the principle of buen vivir conceives the relationship between human beings and nature.Las constituciones multiculturales y ambientales de Ecuador y Bolivia se estructuran alrededor de los siguientes tres elementos: los principios de plurinacionalidad e interculturalidad; los derechos de la naturaleza; y el principio del buen vivir. Estos tres elementos se articulan de manera innovadora y se vinculan de forma creativa en estas dos cartas políticas. Ninguna otra constitución moderna ha incluido y conectado este conjunto de principios y derechos; ninguna ha dado tanta importancia a las epistemologías de los comunidades indígenas. Estos derechos y principios constituyen una contribución imaginativa al debate global sobre la diversidad cultural, los derechos humanos y el medio ambiente. Este conjunto de normas, además, cuestionan la economía política dominante del conocimiento legal que a priori considera al Sur Global como un contexto pobre para la creación de productos jurídicos de calidad. Las contribuciones de las constituciones ecuatoriana y boliviana, sin embargo, no son completamente originales, como algunos de sus creadores y promotores han declarado. Estas innovaciones son variaciones que se construyen dentro de la gramática del constitucionalismo moderno; son, por ejemplo, reinterpretaciones de los conceptos de nación, pueblo y cultura. Sin embargo, algunas otras de sus contribuciones, aunque parten de la gramática del constitucionalismo moderno, van más allá de ella, por ejemplo, el principio del buen vivir. Este artículo describe y analiza los tres componentes que hacen de las constituciones de Bolivia y Ecuador constituciones multiculturales y ambientales. En primer lugar, analiza la idea de que las comunidades indígenas deben ser reconocidas como naciones y la idea de que la comunidad política debe construirse mediante la interacción entre sus diversos grupos culturales. Luego, el artículo explora las formas tradicionales de pensar sobre la naturaleza y sus conexiones con el concepto moderno de derechos con las que están comprometidas las comunidades indígenas andinas; más precisamente, explora la idea de que la naturaleza es un sujeto de derechos. Finalmente, el artículo examina la forma en que el principio del buen vivir concibe la relación entre los seres humanos y la naturaleza

El constitucionalismo radical ambiental y la diversidad cultural en América Latina. Los derechos de la naturaleza y el buen vivir en Ecuador y Bolivia

Las constituciones multiculturales y ambientales de Ecuador y Bolivia se estructuran alrededor de los siguientes tres elementos: los principios de plurinacionalidad e interculturalidad; los derechos de la naturaleza; y el principio del buen vivir. Estos tres elementos se articulan de manera innovadora y se vinculan de forma creativa en estas dos cartas políticas. Ninguna otra constitución moderna ha incluido y conectado este conjunto de principios y derechos; ninguna ha dado tanta importancia a las epistemologías de los comunidades indígenas. Estos derechos y principios constituyen una contribución imaginativa al debate global sobre la diversidad cultural, los derechos humanos y el medio ambiente. Este conjunto de normas, además, cuestionan la economía política dominante del conocimiento legal que a priori considera al Sur Global como un contexto pobre para la creación de productos jurídicos de calidad. Las contribuciones de las constituciones ecuatoriana y boliviana, sin embargo, no son completamente originales, como algunos de sus creadores y promotores han declarado. Estas innovaciones son variaciones que se construyen dentro de la gramática del constitucionalismo moderno; son, por ejemplo, reinterpretaciones de los conceptos de nación, pueblo y cultura. Sin embargo, algunas otras de sus contribuciones, aunque parten de la gramática del constitucionalismo moderno, van más allá de ella, por ejemplo, el principio del buen vivir. Este artículo describe y analiza los tres componentes que hacen de las constituciones de Bolivia y Ecuador constituciones multiculturales y ambientales. En primer lugar, analiza la idea de que las comunidades indígenas deben ser reconocidas como naciones y la idea de que la comunidad política debe construirse mediante la interacción entre sus diversos grupos culturales. Luego, el artículo explora las formas tradicionales de pensar sobre la naturaleza y sus conexiones con el concepto moderno de derechos con las que están comprometidas las comunidades indígenas andinas; más precisamente, explora la idea de que la naturaleza es un sujeto de derechos. Finalmente, el artículo examina la forma en que el principio del buen vivir concibe la relación entre los seres humanos y la naturaleza

Reality, Theory, and a Make-Believe World: The Fundamentalism of the Free Market

The papers collected in this Symposium issue represent a wide range of disciplines, positions and philosophies, and reflect the views of scholars from five countries (Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, the United States and Venezuela). These papers reflect a range of thinking about the freedom that the free market is said to bring, from deeply analytical reflections to more focused case studies. In this, they reflect an equally rich series of panels and discussions that happened over three days spent in Bogota, in May 2006. These conversations, held in the comfortable surroundings of the tranquil campus of the Universidad de los Andes, went well beyond the confines of the papers presented here, and it is a pity that circumstances did not permit the full range of interesting presentations to see the light of day. Nonetheless, it is fair to say that the present volume captures the richness of that encounter, one that welcomed scholars from seven countries and nearly as many disciplines, including law, economics, sociology, anthropology and psychology