George Reid Andrews, Afro-Latin America, 1800–2000 (New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004), pp. viii+284, £11.99; $19.95, pb.
forms in which democracy can appear ; and the lack of efficiency and structural problems that liberal democracies face. Cross-references refer to the following terms :Democracia consocional ; cristiana ; defectuosa ; delegativa ; deliberativa ; directa ; económica ; identitaria ; industrial ; interna (del partido) ; militante ; parlamentaria ; plebiscitaria ; popular ; proporcional ; representativa ; social ; de asamblea ; de base ; de canciller ; de concordancia ; de negación ; de partidos ; and the hybrid democradura. There is also a reference to the bibliography of Teoria(s) de democracia. A table displays the phases in the development of the modern constitutional state ; such tables and charts are also used elsewhere to explain complex phenomena. Nohlen criticises the term Democracia defectuosa, often used in connection with Latin America, but its advocates have a place in his dictionary. Some concepts may be called ‘empirical ’ and ‘historical ’ and are not usually found in Political Science dictionaries : Bill of Rights ; Blitzkrieg ; Doctrina Monroe ; Gaullismo ; perestroika ; Plan Marshall ; or with regard to Spain and Latin America : audiencia ; azteca ; caciquismo ; carlismo ; encomienda ; franquismo ; peronismo. However, their inclusion is characteristic of Nohlen’s interest in historical legacies and sociopolitical contexts. Cross-references indicate where he and his contributors see the explanatory value of these concepts for other terms: for instance, the colonial audiencia is linked to the entry sistema polı́tico ; caciquismo to latifundio, clientelismo and sufragio ; azteca to identidad latinoamericana, indigenismo and malinchismo. The dictionary incorporates the different, and often hybrid, dimensions of identity construction, for example Hispanoamérica, Indoamérica or mestizaje. It defines major currents in the history of ideas but also gives prominence to their specific features in Latin America. There are separate entries for positivismo and positivismo latinoamericano. Latin America’s cepalismo and teorı́a de dependencia are explored in detail. Those of us who have taught the histories, societies and cultures of the region have long waited for a reference work like this. By interrelating Iberoamericaspecific terminology and general theoretical concepts, such as ‘democracy ’, it will help us overcome the fateful isolation of area studies from debates in the disciplinary mainstream. The digestible way in which the authors present their texts allows for the use of the dictionary in both postgraduate and upper-level undergraduate courses. We should not only include it in our reading lists but also allocate specific tasks to students which enable them to embark on the journey of discovery through this truly exciting work. We might end up in controversial and interdisciplinary debates with them, and amongst ourselves, and this is exactly what Nohlen and his collaborators wish for.