{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01903553299492386, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0031725888324873096, 'mean_word_length': 4.849721706864564, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Ricardo Ffrench-Davis and Ernest Tironi (eds.): Latin America and the New International Economic Order (London: MacMillan, 1982, £22.0). Pp. xv + 254.

of capitalist economic development. Thus, for example, proletarianization of the Indian population coincided with the need of the coastal plantations for a cheap labour force and involved the expropriation of Indian land as a basis of separating the Indian from the means of production. He claims that the present policy of emphasizing Indian ethnicity is a ploy on the part of the state to extract them from the current economic crisis within the integrated sector and to re-marginalize them in archaism and misery. Thus ethnicity is imposed by the state, not in the sense that it constitutes the only form of expression from a specific place, but in terms of a specific institutional power. Bonilla also emphasizes that the term ' Indian' is a colonial concept implying exclusion in the sense of being non-white, which must make it a feature of race rather than ethnicity. He sees ethnicity as a product of distortions stemming from the logic of capitalist development. However, he refers to Indianity as a defensive strategy involving the revitalization of culture. He discusses the processes by which these developments occur within a historical context. In one form or another, all of the papers return to the age-old question of whether such social movements constitute a class or an ethnic movement. There is, of course, no reason why these dimensions of inequality should be mutually exclusive. The most obvious feature of the Indian population is that the diacritica of ethnicity are reproduced precisely because of their class location. Furthermore they are reproduced within agencies of cultural reproduction that are located in civil society and consequently have but a weak link to the state. This is why multi-ethnic states are obliged either to eliminate or to expropriate what are referred to as ' minority languages' for fear that, under certain circumstances, they can serve as agencies for the transmission of anti-state ideological forms. Providing one does not make the elementary mistake of falling into the idealism of the false-consciousness trap which claims that class consciousnes is the only real form of interpolative product, there is no reason why one cannot see revitalization movements as expressing both class and ethnic antagonism simultaneously. This does not necessarily involve reducing ethnicity to class nor to seeing one as the product of infrastructural forces and the other as superstructural in the form of culture. This is the weakness of treating ethnicity simply in terms of a mentalism through regarding it as an identity. In this respect the movements are a manifestation of struggle, not only with the state but also with other classes and class fractions. It is the expectation that classes will act as totalities which overlooks the tendency for clases to fragment as a consequence of economic factors with the result that intra-class as well as inter-class conflicts are to be expected. This is implicit in many of the case studies in this volume.