Since its “discovery,” Latin America has played an ambiguous role in the Western imaginary. Unlike “the Orient,” Africa or Oceania, the macro-region has been regarded by both Europeans and Americans as somewhat “backward” than as radically different (Lomnitz 2001:127). The course aims to identify the structural conditions and tackle the strategies that have encouraged and challenged Latin America’s (own) divergent integration under the global condition. After the introductory session, which will discuss the relationship between Global, Area Studies, and Latin American academic production, we will deal with “time-spaces of globalization”: regional and transregional orders established through colonization, nineteenth-century independence movements, and Latin America’s positions in the twentieth-century global conflicts. The second block will focus on “actors of globalization.” We will scrutinize discourses and theories of dependency and global governance from a multidimensional perspective by looking at political movements and international organizations coming from and intervening in the macro-region. The selected readings on global markets of violence, migration, and transnational communities will allow us to address further orders and disorders of globalization. The third block will introduce central debates driven by critical global and Latin American scholarship, bringing the discussion to a theoretical level. Following the arguments of transformative global studies, we will revisit the concept of coloniality, alternatives for decolonizing knowledge, the possibilities and limits of the “global south” as both political and conceptual framework.
The joint reading and discussion of case studies and theoretical explorations aim to provide an overview, which will allow students to identify divergences, interconnections, and parallels within Latin America and concerning other regions. Furthermore, the critical treatment of political and academic discourses endeavors to stimulate reflection on the impact of power asymmetries on both globalization and the knowledge produced about it.
Lomnitz, C. W. (2001). Deep Mexico, silent Mexico. An anthropology of nationalism. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Olstein, Diego. “Latin America in Global History: An Historiographic Overview.” Estudos históricos 30 (2017): 253–72.
Nilsson, Manuela, and Jan Gustafsson, eds. Latin American Responses to Globalization in the 21st Century. International Political Economy Series. Berlin: Sringer-Verlag Berlin and Heidelberg, 2012.
13.10, I. Introduction to the seminar
20.10, II. Latin America in Global studies
Brown, Matthew. “The Global History of Latin America.” Journal of Global History 10, no. 3 (2015): 365–86.
Further reading: Hensel, Silke. “Außereuropäische Geschichte – Globalgeschichte – Geschichte Der Weltregionen Aus Der Perspektive Einer Lateinamerikahistorikerin.” H-Soz-Kult, 02.12.2017. www.hsozkult.de/debate/id/diskussionen-4357.
27.10, III. Time-Spaces of globalization: The Age of Revolutions in Latin America
Sanders, James. “Atlantic Republicanism in Nineteenth-Century Colombia: Spanish America’s Challenge to the Contours of Atlantic History.” Journal of World History 20, no. 1 (2009): 131–50.
Further reading: Brown, Matthew. From Frontiers to Football: An Alternative History of Latin America Since 1800. London: Reaktion Books, 2014.
3.11, IV. Time-Spaces of globalization: Latin America and the First World War
Rinke, Stefan H. The Demise of a World. In: Latin America and the First World War. With the assistance of Christopher W. Reid. Global and international history. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2017, 195-225.
Rinke, Stefan H. Nation and Trans-nation. In Latin America and the First World War. With the assistance of Christopher W. Reid. Global and international history. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2017, 226-255.
10.11, V. Actors of Globalization: Latin America’s Revolutionary Left movements (1960-1970)
Rey Tristán, Eduardo. “5. The Influence of Latin America’s Revolutionary Left in Europe: The Role of Left-Wing Editors.” In Toward a Global History of Latin America’s Revolutionary Left. Edited by Tanya Harmer and Alberto M. Álvarez, 199–226. University of Florida Press, 2021.
Further reading: Nash, Andrew. “Third Worldism.” African Sociological Review / Revue Africaine de Sociologie 7, no. 1 (2003): 94–116.
24.11, VI. Actors of Globalization: Agents of global governance
Deciancio, Melisa, and Diana Tussie. “Globalizing Global Governance: Peripheral Thoughts from Latin America.” Fudan Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences 13, no. 1 (2020): 29–44.
Reinold, Theresa. “The Causes and Effects of Hybrid Anti-impunity Commissions: Outline of a Research Agenda.” In: Global Cooperation Research Papers, no. 26 (2020).
1.12, VII. Actors of Globalization: Global entrepreneurs of violence
Hristov, Jasmin. “Pro-Capitalist Violence and Globalization: Lessons from Latin America.” In The Routledge Handbook of Transformative Global Studies. Edited by S.A.H. Hosseini et al. Routledge, 2020.
Stiles, Thomas S. “Unintended Exports: The Globalization of the Mara Salvatrucha.” In Latin American Responses to Globalization in the 21st Century. Edited by Manuela Nilsson and Jan Gustafsson, 134–48. International Political Economy Series. Berlin: Sringer-Verlag Berlin and Heidelberg, 2012.
8.12, VIII. Actors of Globalization: Migrants and transnational communities
Robinson, William I. Latin America and Global Capitalism: A Critical Globalization Perspective. Johns Hopkins paperback edition. Johns Hopkins studies in globalization. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 2010.
Araújo, Natalie. “Cosmopolitan Revolutionaries: Masculinity, Migration, and Gender Performativity in Latin American London.” Masculinities and Social Change 9, no. 1 (2020): 1–27.
Gruner-Domic, Sandra. “Transnational Lifestyles as a New Form of Cosmopolitan Social Identification? Latin American Women in German Urban Spaces.” Ethnic and Racial Studies 34, no. 3 (2011): 471–89.
15.12, IX. Debates: Modernity, Globalization, and decolonization of knowledge
Mendieta, Eduardo. “Remapping Latin American Studies: Postcolonialism, Subaltern Studies, Post-Occidentalism, and Globalization Theory.” In Coloniality at Large. Latin America and the Postcolonial Debate. Edited by Mabel Moraña, 286–306. Durham [u.a.]: Duke Univ. Press, 2008.
5.1, X. Debates: “Global South” as a heuristic frame
Grovogui, Siba. “A Revolution Nonetheless: The Global South in International Relations.” The Global South 5, no. 1 (2011): 175.
Schneider, Nina. “Between Promise and Skepticism: The Global South and Our Role as Engaged Intellectuals.” The Global South 11, no. 2 (2017): 18.
19.1, XII. Students’ Presentations
26.1, XIII. Students’ Presentations
2.2, XIV. Final Discussion
For each session, students are expected to read in-depth and contribute actively to the discussion of the readings. Participants will be asked to post summaries, insights, further questions, and interesting material in the course’s own Padlet.
Students will choose the evaluation mode between an oral presentation, a written summary, and an essay. The oral presentation (max. twenty minutes long, individual or in groups) should introduce and deal with a related topic or case. Speakers will provide 48h before the session a one-page long handout and submit a written summary no longer than 2000 words by 28 February 2022.
Alternatively, students may submit an essay by 28 February 2022, no longer than 3500 words.
3ra Conferencia de Transiciones Latinoamericanas, Junio 25-26, 2021, Leipzig (Alemania)
Coloquio de Estudios Latinoamericanos – Leipzig (CEL-LE), Graduate School of Global and Area Studies (GSGAS), Research Centre Global Dynamics (ReCentGlobe), University of Leipzig
Nota de les organizadores: La conferencia sera presencial. Sin embargo, se aceptarán contribuciones virtuales (paneles, ponencias) y, en el caso de ser necesario, se cambiará a formato digital, dependiendo de la evolución de la pandemia en el 2021. Les participantes serán informados a tiempo. ¡Cuidense y esperamos poder verles el proximo junio!
the turn of the century, Latin American democracies seem to have entered a new
phase of intense fluctuation. Political, economic and cultural developments
have been disrupted by precipitous crises and countermovements, such as
Argentina’s political and economic collapse in 2001 and its contested process
of restoration, the rise and violent fall of Evo Morales in Bolivia, the peace
agreement in Colombia, Chile’s ostensible stability and the recent protests
against its economic inequality and state violence.
cooperation with the GSGAS and the ReCentGlobe, the CEL-LE invites researchers
to explore the roots and dynamics of recent disruptions in Latin America from a
global perspective. As disruptions, we understand moments of disordering, whose
outcomes and meaning are yet unforeseeable. Disruptions might be temporary
disarrayments but may also anticipate structural change and advancement towards
new political and economic orders. Based on this understanding, we aim to
explore and relate both potentially destructive and productive impulses
emanating from fluctuations, turmoils, and hindrances faced by the subcontinent
since the 2000s.
conveners invite researchers in the humanities and social sciences, and
especially young scholars – Ph.D. researchers and Post-Docs – working on or
interested in Latin America to address and discuss the following questions:
Which are the main conflicts that Latin America has faced in the last decades?
How do they relate to each other? What are the roots of these disruptions, and
what impacts do they have at the regional level? How are the Latin American
political regimes and communities responding to disruptions? How do disorders
in Latin America relate to current challenges to democracy in other world
conference invites scholars from different academic fields who are currently
working on the following topics:
democracies: illiberal state and non-governmental actors, such as Bolsonaro and
the role of Pentecostal Church in Brazil, parliamentary takeovers in Brazil and
Bolivia, creeping authoritarianism in Venezuela and Nicaragua, the role of
military and police forces in political crises in Bolivia and Chile
democracies: police brutality, forced disappearance and femicides in Mexico and
Argentina, political repression in Bolivia, Colombia, Chile, Ecuador,
Nicaragua, and Venezuela
migration crisis: Venezuela emigration, Colombia’s change from sender to
receiver, Mexico as Latin America’s northern border
ecological crisis: extractivism in the Amazon, privatization of water resources
in El Salvador, illegal burning of protected areas for property projects and crop
plantations in Argentina
media: Oligopolies, state regulations of the press, fear-mongering by the
media, political uses of media coverage of elections and protests
disruptions in Transatlantic Perspective: Political disruptions, civil
discontent and disobedience, and democratic backsliding in a transregional
proposals for individual presentations or panels. We ask those interested in
participating to submit abstracts for individual presentations (max. 250 words)
or panel proposals (max. 200 words) before February
28th, 2021, in English, Spanish, German or Portuguese.
different panel formats:
Keynote roundtable (online/onsite)
Conference panels (online/onsite)
Workshop panels moderated by experts, where participants can discuss research circulated beforehand (online/hybrid)
Conference languages are English and Spanish. The conveners will try to
accommodate the language wishes of invited speakers. However, speakers might be
asked to change the language of their presentation to accommodate the panels.
Conference registration fee: 30 Euros
(On-site participants). Depending on funding possibilities, we will support
travel and accommodation expenses for some participants requiring financial
assistance. Virtual participation is free of charge.
CEL-LE is a study and research group initiated in 2019 by 4 scholars (Carolina Rozo, Agustina Carrizo de Reimann, Daniel S. León, and Karen Silva Torres) with the purpose of strengthening Latin American Studies at the University of Leipzig. With this aim, Cel-Le organizes the annual conference “Latin American Transitions”. During the three-day event, junior researchers and experts from different academic backgrounds in social sciences and humanities reflected on and discussed past and present processes of reconfiguration in Latin America. The debate was guided by the questions: When and where do we identify turning points leading to processes of reconfiguration in the subcontinent? How have local, regional, national, and transnational actors contributed, adapted to and challenged processes of recomposition?
In the afternoon on the 17th of October, the conference started with a welcome meeting and the participants proceeded to watch the opening film Cómprame un revolverwithin the frame of the film festivalLateinamerikanische Tage.
On October 18th
the first panelabout populist
reconfigurations moderated by KAREN SILVA TORRES (Leipzig) began with a
historical outline of the refugee regime in Brazil presented by VINÍCIUS CRUZ
CAMPOS (Oldenburg). Campos focused on the refugee regimes under different
Brazilian governments in the 20th century. He drew the conclusion
that populist policies endangered the refugee regime that was established in
Latin America through the Cartagena Process in the year 1984. The discussion
turned from Brazil to the case of Peronism in Argentina. JULIA FIERMAN (New
York) addressed the function of emotional discourse as a central component of
the Peronist ideology. In her
interviews with militants of the kirchnerismo,
one branch of Peronism, interviewees stressed their emotional attachment to
core values like compañerismo (comradeship),
social justice and love as a way to define the essence of the movement. ESTEBAN
MORERA APARICIO (Tübingen) delivered a theoretical definition of populism. The
main problem, as he argued, is to make populism an operational analytical
category. Building on Ernesto Laclau’s approach, he pointed out the need of
considering the horizon of future expectations to generate political demands,
since political communities are built precisely because of future and not past
expectations, as these expectations are used to justify political actions. To
exemplify the devastating consequences that populist policies have caused in
recent times, MAGALY SANCHEZ (Princeton) analyses the “catastrophe” of
Venezuela. For Sanchez, the process of the destruction of the Venezuelan
society is without precedent. She sees three principal elements: the
relationship between the state and the society, the humanitarian collapse and
the massive migration. In the course of the regime of Hugo Chávez, populist
policies gradually progressed into authoritarianism. According to Sanchez, the
Venezuelan political regime is not a failed state but a network of criminal
alliances sustained by dysfunctional criminal economies. In the following
discussion, participants explored further the different approaches to the
dynamics of populism and explored the possibility to compare diverging cases,
such as Argentina or Venezuela.
The second Panelabout national reconfigurations chaired
by DANIEL LEÓN (Leipzig) started with a closer look at the presidential
elections in Mexico of 2018. LUIS EDUARDO LEÓN GANATIOS (Guanajuato)
investigated the interplay between the three coalitions and their corresponding
most important issues: corruption, economy, and delinquency. For example,
Andrés Manuel López Obrador, the current Mexican president, made not the
concern over criminality connected to the voting blocs of the rich and middle
classes his main electoral issue, but corruption. In the second presentation,
MARGARITA CUERVO (Munich) explained the reconfiguration of the National Army of
Colombia under new political circumstances. The Colombian Army enjoys a big
prestige in society and in comparison to other Latin American countries it can
acquire a lot of public funding. Although reform of the military was not
planned in the light of the FARC agreement, inside the army the idea arose to
adopt new tasks beyond the internal focus on public order. The Colombian Army
has aimed to export its security expertise like conflict management. Still, it
should be questioned what kind of security products the Colombian Army actually
means to export. The last contributor to this Panel, RAFAEL CASTRO (Hamburg),
reflected upon the ideological components in the reconfiguration of Colombian foreign
policy. Methodologically, Castro proposed a poststructuralist approach and
introduced the example of the government of Ivan Duque. Castro pointed out that
the situation in Venezuela acts in the discourse of Duque as a way to create
antagonists and oppositions. The Colombian president brands the regional
organization UNASUR as ideological and “Venezuelanized”, meanwhile he proclaims
the opponent institution PROSUR to be pragmatic and more flexible. During the
exchange of ideas after the presentation, participants discussed the
ideological implications of the claims of professionalism and pragmatism in
political discourses. In addition, the participants deliberated about the
differentiation between corruption and criminality.
The third Panel addressed cultural reconfigurations in Latin America chaired by AGUSTINA CARRIZO DE REIMANN (Leipzig). FLORIAN GRAFL (Munich) proposed to examine processes of social reconfiguration during the period of independence by means of analyzing the national sketch collections of Cuba and Mexico. Grafl compared the national sketch collections of these two countries with its predecessor in Spain to indicate differences and similarities in using stereotypes and manners to construct national identities. ARIANE KOVAC (Bonn) referred to the cultural reconfiguration triggered by evangelical communities in the former civil war region Ayacucho, Peru. The rise of evangelical churches during the conflict was directly related to the absence of the Catholic Church, as well as their ability to supply a new community identity. Regarding the remembrance of political violence, Kovac highlighted that the forgiving perpetrators were a distinguishing feature of evangelical believers. In this way, also former perpetrators, who joined these churches, were able to redeem their sins. The discussion to this panel addressed both on the construction of target groups by national sketch collections and the methodological challenge posed by the analysis of pictures. Regarding the role of pentecostal churches in Latin America, participants discussed their growing significance as an electorate power and elaborated on the issues of violence, women, and ethnicity within pentecostal movements.
The second day of the conference concluded with an open forumfor a broader audience on the topic of migration and transformation
in Latin America chaired by Magaly Sanchez. After a general introduction by
Sanchez about how the global phenomenon of migration in the 21st century
differs from the 20th century, MARIA GABRIELA TROMPETERO (Bielefeld) talked
about the massive flow of Venezuelan migrants to Colombia. She stated that
currently there are approximately 1, 4 million Venezuelans living in Colombia.
In view of this migratory wave, a new migration law based on the Cartagena
Refugee Regime was enacted, allowing extension of the right to asylum. This
strong response of the Colombian State marks for Trompetero an exemplary model
of how to deal with problems caused by massive migration. FRANZISKA BARTH
(Berlin) referred to the impact of migration processes in the Sierra de
Zongolica, Mexico, on family constellations and gender roles. Mostly men from
this poor region migrate in search of job opportunities to the USA and Canada. However, the
goal is always to go back to their homes with enough savings. Barth could show
that, in the absence of their men, women take more responsibility for the
households and their communities. As a consequence, women have started to
undermine the patriarchal system of this region. In her presentation,
INDI-CAROLINA KRYG (Hamburg) argued for the need to consider migrants as
political actors and not to victimize them. Based on her interviews with
Central American immigrants in three cities in Mexico, she displayed the
diversity of political participation on account of the immigrants. In the
discussion afterward, the audience pointed to the paradox of the discrimination
of the Central American immigrants in Mexico in view of Mexican migrants’
comparable experience in the US. All keynote speakers underlined the fact that
migration has been foremost an enrichment for receiving societies.
On the last day of the conference, the 19th of October started with the panel dedicated to the analysis of
alternative strategies of local actors in conflict situations. The panel
was organized in cooperation with Ph.D. Students from Katholische Universität
Eichstätt-Ingolstadt and members of Zentralinstitut für Lateinamerikastudien
(ZILAS). THOMAS FISCHER (Eichstätt), who chaired the panel, introduced the
broad definition of conflict, on which the presentations built, and their
approach “from the bottom up to the top”. JIMENA SALAZAR (Eichstätt) began by
outlining the socioecological conflict caused by the contamination of water
reservoirs by illegal mining industries in the region of Andahuaylas, in the
second poorest region in Peru. Against the threat posed by the family-owned
mining companies to the survival of farmers’ communities, social organizations
have become active. Salazar analyzed the role of the state and juridical
pluralism in these rural communities within the context of the negotiations
between 2011 and 2017. MAXIMILIAN GÖRGENS (Eichstätt) introduced the case of
indigenous resistance against the destruction of the Parque Nacional Isiboro Sécure in Bolivia. Based on the theory of
frame alignment from David Snow, Görgens chose a qualitative approach by
conducting various interviews to investigate the specific problems of this
conflict. Despite Evo Morales’ identification with the indigenous cause,
“development” remains a threat to the Bolivian nature reserve and is deepening
the internal division within local indigenous communities. During the
discussion, participants exchange ideas about the role of the researcher and
her/his responsibility to establish a relationship based on trust with the
informants. Furthermore, the relationship between law and disorder and the
concept of the state were also addressed.
The challenges for indigenous resistance also affects the
digital realm, as ULRICH MORENZ (Eichstätt) described for the case of activists
of the Minga in Cauca, Colombia.
Morenz looked into the strategies to legitimize and delegitimize the indigenous
protest movement. In the current media landscape of Colombia, there is a high
concentration of the mainstream media in the hand of a few companies which are
not representing the interests of the indigenous people. For that reason, the
activists’ social media campaign during the blockade of a crucial traffic
center was very important. NATALIA VELASQUEZ (Eichstätt) examined another
example of how to develop new strategies to overcome socio-political conflicts
in Colombia. For this aim, she referred three cases in the department of
Santander. Considering the peace treaty with the FARC, Velasquez defined the
actual phase as “post-treaty” and not “post-conflict”, since new agents have
been entering the scene as new conflicts are arising. The inhabitants of
Santander, who want to leave the conflict behind, emphasize their will to stay
in the territory and to have a dignified life. As key points of her research,
she highlighted the significance to engage in collective actions, to analyze the issue
of delegitimizing armed combatants and the intersection of distinct
dynamics on local and territorial levels. Participants debated the role of
social media in the present conflicts and pointed to the need to further
investigate the impact of Twitter on the perception of indigenous activism. The
role of Venezuela came back as a relevant example of the process of social reconfiguration
in the study introduced by Velasquez. Also, the capacity for mediation between
municipalities and the government in Colombia was discussed.
The speakers of the fifth
Panel introduced and discussed the topic of access to resources, resistance and international dependency
chaired by RALF LEITERITZ (Bogotá). DANIEL LEÓN started by addressing the
stability of the authoritarian regime in Venezuela and depicted it as a case of
survivalist equilibrium, shaped by
the alliance of the regime with the military in a time of low oil prices. When
the stakes of holding the power increased in 2014 the regime eliminated
“expensive” partners while the coercive apparatus guaranteed its support for
the government by means of repression. Now the costs for a political exit of
the chavismo are too high with the
effect that the survivalist equilibrium is the best rational choice for the
regime. With the purpose of taking a comparative approach to Venezuela’s
dependency on oil, MOHAMMAD REZA FARZANEGAN (Marburg) discussed the link
between oil income and the middle class in Iran. Using econometric tools and
based on historical data from the last decades, he developed a model that
defines the effect of the oil income on the development of the middle class and
foretold a positive response to an oil shock for the middle classes in the
future. Farzanegan concludes that oil income generates a positive outcome for
the middle classes. During the discussion, the participants exchanged their
ideas about the consequences of the oil business for political institutions,
such as taxation policies and the role of neoliberal reforms in the face of a
crisis. Considering the dramatic situation in Venezuela it was also questioned
whether the concept of political order should be applied to the current regime,
and disorder should be used instead of political order. In addition, it was
discussed which other significant economic variables besides oil should be
considered for the analysis of Venezuela.
The conference closed with a final discussion on the transition process of Latin American research.
The conveners opened the debate by asking the keynote speaker MATTHIAS MIDDELL
(Leipzig), why Latin-America remains underrepresented in the field of the
Global and Area Studies. Middell pointed first to the fact that there are not
many Latin American experts working with a global perspective. From his point
of view, it seems therefore necessary that Latin American researchers engage
more actively in transregional studies and that further decolonization from the
influence of the US-American social sciences takes place. Furthermore, Middell
argued that Latin American universities have to build broader networks and
develop their capacities to organize in the field of Global and Area Studies.
The discussion then turned to the political engagement of scholars. Middell
pointed to the general dilemma faced by researchers willing to contribute to
the political discussion, their need to take funding and how this can challenge
personal and intellectual independence. Thomas Fischer argued that, despite the
risks, researchers nowadays are compelled to engage in the public debate and
that Latin American experience may be an inspiring example for this purpose;
for instance, in order to understand the dynamics of multicultural societies in
Europe and of social movements looking for alternatives to the hegemonic
capitalist society. For this aim, researchers must as well reflect upon their
place of enunciation, in order to prevent unproductive eurocentrism. The lack
of professors dedicated to the study and research of Latin America at the
University of Leipzig was described as a significant setback for both the study
of the global condition and the deconstruction of the production process of
The 3rd conference on Latin American Transitions convened by CEL-LE will invite scholars to discuss, “Disruptions of Latin American Democracies: Roots and dynamics of current conflicts.” The conference will take place in October 2020.
Conveners: Coloquio de Estudios Latinoamericanos – Leipzig (CEL-LE) The Graduate School of Global and Area Studies, University of Leipzig Partners: Chair for Comparative History/Ibero-American History (University of Leipzig) Lateinamerikanische Tage Film Festival
The image of instability and violence commonly associated with Latin America disregards the socio-cultural longevity and geopolitical continuity that has characterized the region over the last two centuries. In this context, crises have depicted periods of cultural, political and economic reconfiguration. Processes of recomposition have had both devastating and beneficial consequences for different communities and regions. These processes are polyvalent, i.e. they may have different functions, forms, facets, and outcomes. For instance, the processes of national reconfiguration after the “third wave of democratization” in the late 20th century led to reinforce the rule of law in Peru, but also to the return of militarism to Brazil and Venezuela. This year’s conference proposes to explore diverse, past and present processes of reconfiguration in Latin America. When and where do we identify turning points leading to processes of reconfiguration in the subcontinent? How have local, regional, national, and transnational actors contributed, adapted to and challenged recomposition? And more generally, how have agents and structures promoted or countered continuity within processes of reconfiguration? Addressing these general questions requires analysis at different levels, of different cases, and from different approaches. To foster rich interdisciplinary discussions, the conveners invites scholars, especially junior researchers, from different academic backgrounds in social sciences and humanities.
This year’s conference will feature a keynote roundtable entitled “Populist (Re)configurations? Past, present and future dynamics in Latin America”. The following three international experts will discuss the above topic from sociological, historical, and anthropological perspectives:
➢ Prof. Dr. Magaly Sanchez (Princeton University)
➢ Dr. Esteban Morera Aparicio (University of Tübingen)
➢ Dr. Julia Fiermann (Columbia University)
We are also happy to announce that Cel-Le will collaborate for this year’s conference with the film festival Lateinamerikanische Tage, which celebrates its tenth anniversary in Leipzig. At least two of the conference’s events will be co-hosted by both organizations.
For individual presentations (max. 250 words) or panel proposals (max. 200 words. 3-5 presentations), please submit abstracts before August 19, 2019. Conference languages are English and Spanish. However, prospective speakers can present their presentation proposals in English, Spanish, German or Portuguese. Contact: cel-le(at)uni-leipzig.de Conference registration fee: 30 Euros.
Summer School 2019 “1989 – A Caesura in Global History and its Consequences” XVII International Summer School of the Graduate School Global and Area Studies of the Research Academy Leipzig,
Leipzig, 12 to 15 June 2019
The Latin American region offers evidence for considering “1989” a caesura in global history, and not just a Central European historical particularity. Latin America was one of the main test grounds for the neo-liberal structural adjustment programs prescribed by the “Washington Consensus.” The region was also one of the main cases for what Samuel Huntington called “the third wave of democratization,” a concept that many associate with the year 1989. Moreover, country specific events in or around the year 1989 would suggest transnational interdependencies of social, economic and political factors. A few empirical examples are: the neoliberalization of previously staunchly revisionist states like Mexico, the end of long-standing military governments and democratization of Argentina, Brazil, Chile, and Haiti, as well as the violent reactions to IMF-sponsored structural adjustment measures in Venezuela. This panel aims to critically analyze the relationship between the social, political, and economic processes leading to or following “1989.” Scholars have in the past argued in favor and against the connection between social processes in Latin America and a “global 1989.” By bringing in inter- and multidisciplinary perspectives, the panel hopes to achieve a critical discussion that helps us to further understand whether contemporary changes in the region – like the left-right regional political shifts or continuing economic woes in countries like Argentina and Venezuela – are related to the global historical caesura of 1989. Detracting arguments are particularly welcome, as they would enrich the panel’s theoretical discussion.
Please submit abstracts for individual presentations (max. 250 words), before April 29, 2019.
Queremos compartir con todos ustedes la iniciativa Coloquio de estudios latinoamericanos en Leipzig (CEL-LE). Esta nueva propuesta surge a partir de la exitosa convocatoria que recibimos en la primera versión de la conferencia Transiciones en Latinoamérica, llevada a cabo en la Universidad de Leipzig en Octubre de 2018.
CEL-LE busca generar un espacio para la reflexión, el pensamiento crítico y el debate sobre Latinoamérica dentro de un marco global, así como reforzar los estudios latinoamericanistas en Leipzig. Para lograr dichos objetivos se realizarán una serie de actividades cuyas fechas estarán disponibles en nuestro sitio web. Agradecemos de antemano compartir estas actividades con sus contactos.
También pueden consultar más detalles sobre CEL-LE en
Igualmente nos pueden contactar a través de nuestra nueva cuenta de correo firstname.lastname@example.org y seguir en la cuenta de facebook http://www.facebook.com/Coloquio-de-Estudios-Latinoamericanos-en-Leipzig-CELLE
Esperamos contar con la activa participación de todos ustedes y los invitamos a seguirnos en los canales antes mencionados.