This is the logic positioned in the conception and conduct of the domains of different interest fields and institutional spheres: our society is in the best epoch regarding opportunities, these are moments of great prosperity thanks to the emergence of a globalised economy and the opening of a common market.

Maybe the euphoria over the success of this model, and the interest in the ideological affirmation of the process of globalisation, has put us in the situation of receiving societies, conceptually over-sized and feigned the benefits of the existing model. Therefore it is necessary to shape it in its real dimension to examine in depth the treatment which has not only been constituted in a present time theme, but is considered a global phenomenon that has to be studied and assumed with responsibility towards the whole of society.

From our point of view, it is necessary to view the outcomes of this process from the experiences of the peoples in Latin-America for whom the application of the global formula has generated disastrous consequences; and, in particular in Ecuador, where the testing is still in process. It becomes each time more important to have a continuous debate in the different social and popular spaces.

This process of globalisation has for some resulted in improved access to information to all corners of the world. For others, it is about the market’s promises of goods and capital for the whole planet. As such, various writers agree upon pointing out that only those sectors of huge productivity and high competitivity may join the party. A big majority of the population is being marginalised, excluded from all these ‘’benefits’’, intensifying furthermore the poverty-gap between countries, individuals, classes, indigenous peoples etc. So, the rationality of the system explains itself as being interconnected between the international economy, the domestic economy of a country and the everyday lives of persons (By Oscar Ugarteche. ‘’There is a very strong interrelation between the micro- and macro-economy’’. Globalizacion y crisis en debate pág. 32 EL DESARROLLO EN LA GLOBALIZACIÓN Editorial: Nueva Sociedad. ILDIS Quito-Ecuador). With Oscar Ugarteche we can agree that the world of globalisation affects to a bigger or smaller degree, directly and indirectly, each and every one of us materially and spiritually.

The global economy was inaugurated at the end of the 80s through the beginning of the 90s with the collapse of the socialist system, the falling apart of the Soviet Union and the disappearance of socialism from Eastern Europe. With the fall of the wall that divided the two worlds, the empire of globalisation was affirmed and imposed without asking anybody and this is the origin of the accumulation of capital on world-scale. It is during this decade when a one-dimensional world developed with an essentially economist’s focus and with a high concentration of wealth. This not only ignoring the development of other dimensions of the human work but also supporting a conduct based on competition, a global culture of consumption which endeavours to homogenise the diversity of local cultures. This is supported by an authoritarian political system, which depends on a continuous process of modernisation.

The project of modernisation and the aggressive expansion of capital do not have any concern for cultural diversity, fundamental rights to survive and to develop in a framework of diversity in a world without frontiers in which the state has transformed itself into a market and client for foreign interests, with neither dignity nor sovereignty, under the domination of multinational companies and the plans of multinational organisations. This generates an economy of accumulation, politics of control, culturally and socially dominated by interests of "modernity". But, these rules of the game allow the existence and the circulation of speculative capital that is not meant for investment, which could revitalise the economy of the country or comprehensive development conceived by the different local identities. Furthermore there is a situation of inequality, injustice and a breakdown of cultural and human values.

But during the take off of this process of globalisation, paradoxically also new forms of resistance in various regions on the world arose, against the exclusion from fundamental rights to human dignity, in particular concerning human carriers of a cultural historic heritage, as is the case with the peoples whose identity and specific nature are not recognised by the national state. These conditions of adversity have provoked worldwide reactions. For example the social reactions in Europe, Middle East, Asia and particularly the resistance mechanisms implemented by the indigenous peoples in various regions of Latin-America, Mexico, Ecuador, Bolivia and others who head-on have demonstrated against an alienating and homogenising model. However, the resistance doesn’t only come from the indigenous peoples and identities, but comes from broad sectors of civil society that is clear in view of the huge mobilisations at world-scale like those in Seattle, Washington, Genoa, against the WTO, IMF and World Bank.

Besides these intentional social reactions of the indigenous peoples, this epoch has permitted the opening up of spaces for reflection and the emergence of new proposals and alternatives. These are spaces generating from a logic coming from an harmonic coexistence between humanity and mother earth, from where an economy based on solidarity, moral principles, equal distribution of wealth, recognition and respect for diversity, and absolute respect for mother nature is supported.

We, the indigenous peoples from each space and geographic location in Indo Latin-America think that the extension of the benefits on a global scale cannot be done only through the opening of the markets and capital. It is important to establish the conditions for an internationalisation of information and organisational initiatives, globalise participatory citizenship, create a civil society with a global character, and globalise democracy, the practice of an intercultural society. From this perspective, our peoples have shaped a new democratic context starting from the battle for the recognition of cultural diversity, which surpasses the limits of the present structure and incorporates new initiatives and contributions from the local identities and other sectors of civil society.

The actions of the Ecuadorian indigenous movement, taken as mechanisms of resistance over the course of the most recent times, consist of a series of qualitative transformations, such as the transformation of its organisational forms, such as the fundamental changes oriented towards the society, and the construction of fundamental axis in its demanding struggles.

While incorporating new indigenous demands, they strengthen the actions and the fight in a process of unity. They increased a qualifying element in this process, which expresses the very important moment for the indigenous movement: THE PROPOSAL OF THE DECADE, the construction of a pluri-national state and an intercultural society. This marks a qualitative difference in relation to other fights of the contemporary epoch. The fight to get the state to acknowledge its pluri-national character is, because it needs to recognise cultural and historic DIVERSITY and to develop a plural society, in the framework of mutual respect and for the establishment of a real national unity. That is to say, implement the necessary conditions towards reunification and establishment of a harmonic coexistence of the UNITY IN DIVERSITY, opposed to an exclusive, uni-national, authoritarian state; and opposed to an Ecuadorian society markedly prejudiced, racist and intolerant. The Ecuadorian society refuses to recognise the reality of its history and its everyday forms have not contributed to the construction of a true national identity.

Pluri-nationality is the strategic axis from which its practices, its organisations, its orientation to the general fight in function of the national society are being articulated. This fight is also a political fight. Important events within this process are for example the fight for the constitutional reform through the Constitutional Assembly and the Ecuadorian legislation, the ratification of the Convention 169 of the International Labour Organisation (ILO); and, the recognition of collective rights and those of indigenous peoples; proposals that have been formulated since the Confederation Of Indigenous Nationalities of Ecuador, CONAIE. These historic deeds are those that constitute the indigenous movement of Ecuador, the fundamental social actor at the end of the previous millennium and at the beginning of the present. The indigenous movement will become the POLITICAL SUBJECT, with determining importance on the national political scene.

Nevertheless, it is necessary to mention that in mankind’s acute crisis, quantification of actions and achievements reached by new sectors and social actors in spheres inaccessible to wider society alone do not contribute in any way to overcome the grave problems of the present. They seem to be numerical descriptions with results lacking a vision and orientation, without option to take on responsibilities.

The phenomena and dynamics of the contemporary world oblige us to take a break and to reinstate a scene of major reflection and analysis. To be able to respond adequately to the process, we think it necessary to maintain the impetus in the search for agreements, and for us to think about mechanisms and conditions towards a necessary evaluation in a highly vulnerable and important moment. A revision and redesigning of strategies and qualification of the results is urgent. It is necessary from an organic perspective of the actors and civil society to revise the general agenda of our actions opposite to the model, to structural adjustment, privatisation, and to establish a strong response to the daily situation of society.

Above all, it is urgent from the criticism and self-critique to pursue a real process of internal evaluation on all levels and organisational spaces, historical actors opposite to the model, to the system and the general crisis. The task of frequent evaluation is a fundamental part of the process of battle, it is the permanent exercise of a transparent action towards the internal and external in the framework of ethics and morals.

In this perspective, the indigenous movement requires of a retrospective look, as is practice in its daily actions, to refine qualitatively the temporary results and strategy whose mission it is to pursue a social, cultural, economic and political project of great span. Further, the history of the indigenous movement is penetrated by experiences of success and failure, but above all moments of great risk; nevertheless, it has obtained a substantial growth at the end of the latest decade and it has experienced a qualitative leap at the beginning of the new millennium. But this growth gives us the reading that it has also generated a crisis for which we should not hesitate to realise this big assignment; evaluate the crisis of the growth of the indigenous movement.

We have the necessary tools to construct an agenda of general evaluation of the indigenous process. It is necessary to rigorously face our responsibilities and challenges on the basis of an historical project of the indigenous movement. We need spaces of reflection and evaluation, and above all we need to exercise social control, and play our part in the legislative process and political alliances. The capacity of political management in the national context urgently needs to be revised, also to deepen our internal debate and prevent the institutional dispersion and tendencies in the spaces they have created so far. The beginning of the new millennium places us for the obligation to act according to the real requirements. With responsibility and under maintenance in positioning to firmly confront the adversities of the future with the reestablishment of the process of the indigenous movement based on its ideological position, which historically has been the backbone in its strategy of battle.