Filtering by
- Creators: School of Historical, Philosophical and Religious Studies
- Creators: Historical, Philosophical & Religious Studies, Sch
- Member of: Barrett, The Honors College Thesis/Creative Project Collection
The Shining Path, or Sendero Luminoso, is peculiar among Latin American revolutions for a multitude of reasons, ranging from the intensity of its violent tactics to the group’s muddled Maoist ideology. Analyses of the group tend to label it a mystery or an enigma. The purpose of this thesis is to offer the charismatic nature of the authority wielded by Abimael Guzmán, the energetic leader of the group also known as Presidente Gonzalo, as an explanation for some of the Shining Path’s idiosyncrasies, particularly their relentlessly bloodthirsty rise and sharp decline. Although much of the previous literature on the Shining Path uses the word “charismatic” to describe Guzmán, very little work has analyzed the particular implications of the successful creation of a charismatic leader-follower dynamic as a key part of senderismo. Using the framework established by German sociologist Max Weber, this paper analyzes a number of major characteristics of charismatic leaders and applies them to Guzmán. Not only did he exhibit many of the typical features of a charismatic leader, but it may have been is successful development of this particular style of authority which led to both the bloodthirstiness of Sendero’s military arm and the group’s struggle to find an identity after Guzmán’s capture. The Shining Path followed the power arc expected of a charismatic leader-follower relationship, allowing Guzmán to exploit the peasant population to create chaos and fear in the Andes in his effort to bring about a “popular revolution.” The purpose of this paper is not to discredit other theories regarding Sendero, as it was largely a sui generis movement, but to argue several of its particular qualities can be attributed to the charismatic nature of Presidente Gonzalo’s authority.
The United States Supreme Court decided Ramos v. Louisiana in 2020, requiring all states to convict criminal defendants by a unanimous jury. However, this case only applied to petitioners on direct, and not collateral, appeal. In this thesis, I argue that the Ramos precedent should apply to people on collateral appeal as well, exploring the implications of such a decision and the criteria that should be used to make the decision in the case before the court, Edwards v. Vannoy (2021). Ultimately, I find that because the criteria currently used to determine retroactivity of new criminal precedents does not provide a clear answer to the question posed in Edwards, the Court should give more weight to the defendant's freedoms pursuant to the presumption of innocence while considering the potential for any disastrous outcomes.