Pachamama—La Universidad del ‘Buen Vivir’: A First Nations …
851
(Coordinadora de las Organizaciones Indígenas de la Cuenca Amazónica). COICA
considers the principle and vision of ‘Buen Vivir’ as a foundation of their specific
cosmology and hereby use different terms (like for example “Maloka”) (Huanacuni
2010).
‘Buen Vivir’ goes beyond being a concept; it represents an ethical paradigm, in
which nature is understood as belonging to the indigenous people and their respective nations. Following Estermann (1999), ‘Sumak kawsay’ can be understood as a
‘cosmological ethic’ searching for harmony and conviviality between human beings
and nature. This approach is not about defining a complete life, or an ‘art of living’
(García 2004). The relationship between humans and nature is not understood in the
sense of an ontological rupture, where the wellbeing of the modern human being is
in the center of analysis and reflection. The core of these concepts is the preservation
of the cosmic order and life giving relations and relationships. The ‘collective’ refers
to everything existing. Harmony can only be created in a holistic and integrational
perspective on everything and every existing being. Estermann (1999) here refers to
co- and interdependency.
Thanks to indigenous organizations, to social movements and the institutions of
civil society, the term ‘sumac kawsay’ or ‘Buen Vivir’ (León 2008a) was legitimized
through legislation and a constitutional assembly. Acosta and Martínez (2009) discuss it in the context of developmental strategies; Welsh (2009) sees it as a political
paradigm, as an ethical discourse and as a term of gender (León 2008b). Like this,
‘Buen Vivir’ holistically connects different dimensions and fields of life. This brings
ecological, socio-cultural, spiritual and political dimensions of an alternative developmental path into play and suggests a new developmental ethics (Cortez and Wagner
2010).
The utilitarian relation of humans towards nature, the monocultural-colonial orientational pattern of state and the asymmetric structuring of society are deeply criticized here. Developmental approaches founded in ‘sumak kawsay’ are grounded
in thoughts of plurinational (recognizing differences) states and an intercultural
(collective commonalities) society. Within the framework of this paradigm, plurinationality and interculturality (Walsh 2009) can be understood as complementary
political principles, restructuring and decolonizing the postcolonial state at a local
level (Cortez and Wagner 2010). For the sociologist and political scientist Quijano
(2000), the process of decolonization has to play a crucial role in the creation of a
sustainable society: Behind the ‘coloniality of power’ is not only a structural racist
criterion, but a will to dominate nature.
In order to operationalize the concept, the economist and indigenous activist
Germán Muruchi presents the four principles of ‘Buen Vivir’. Reciprocity (1); every
being and life exists within mutual reciprocity. Any form of life does not exist in
an isolated way and will not be in opposition to others. Plurality (2); life creates
diversity and variety as an individual process of living. Cyclic movement of life
(3); time is not linear and moves in spirals, inverting. Future implies a principle of
return Equilibrium (4); Health is not regarded as absence of illness, but as collective
systemic state of perfection (Muruchi Poma 2017).
851
(Coordinadora de las Organizaciones Indígenas de la Cuenca Amazónica). COICA
considers the principle and vision of ‘Buen Vivir’ as a foundation of their specific
cosmology and hereby use different terms (like for example “Maloka”) (Huanacuni
2010).
‘Buen Vivir’ goes beyond being a concept; it represents an ethical paradigm, in
which nature is understood as belonging to the indigenous people and their respective nations. Following Estermann (1999), ‘Sumak kawsay’ can be understood as a
‘cosmological ethic’ searching for harmony and conviviality between human beings
and nature. This approach is not about defining a complete life, or an ‘art of living’
(García 2004). The relationship between humans and nature is not understood in the
sense of an ontological rupture, where the wellbeing of the modern human being is
in the center of analysis and reflection. The core of these concepts is the preservation
of the cosmic order and life giving relations and relationships. The ‘collective’ refers
to everything existing. Harmony can only be created in a holistic and integrational
perspective on everything and every existing being. Estermann (1999) here refers to
co- and interdependency.
Thanks to indigenous organizations, to social movements and the institutions of
civil society, the term ‘sumac kawsay’ or ‘Buen Vivir’ (León 2008a) was legitimized
through legislation and a constitutional assembly. Acosta and Martínez (2009) discuss it in the context of developmental strategies; Welsh (2009) sees it as a political
paradigm, as an ethical discourse and as a term of gender (León 2008b). Like this,
‘Buen Vivir’ holistically connects different dimensions and fields of life. This brings
ecological, socio-cultural, spiritual and political dimensions of an alternative developmental path into play and suggests a new developmental ethics (Cortez and Wagner
2010).
The utilitarian relation of humans towards nature, the monocultural-colonial orientational pattern of state and the asymmetric structuring of society are deeply criticized here. Developmental approaches founded in ‘sumak kawsay’ are grounded
in thoughts of plurinational (recognizing differences) states and an intercultural
(collective commonalities) society. Within the framework of this paradigm, plurinationality and interculturality (Walsh 2009) can be understood as complementary
political principles, restructuring and decolonizing the postcolonial state at a local
level (Cortez and Wagner 2010). For the sociologist and political scientist Quijano
(2000), the process of decolonization has to play a crucial role in the creation of a
sustainable society: Behind the ‘coloniality of power’ is not only a structural racist
criterion, but a will to dominate nature.
In order to operationalize the concept, the economist and indigenous activist
Germán Muruchi presents the four principles of ‘Buen Vivir’. Reciprocity (1); every
being and life exists within mutual reciprocity. Any form of life does not exist in
an isolated way and will not be in opposition to others. Plurality (2); life creates
diversity and variety as an individual process of living. Cyclic movement of life
(3); time is not linear and moves in spirals, inverting. Future implies a principle of
return Equilibrium (4); Health is not regarded as absence of illness, but as collective
systemic state of perfection (Muruchi Poma 2017).