In Indigenous Cosmopolitics in the Andes, Marisol de la Cadena advances a radical critique of modern political ontology by arguing that contemporary Indigenous movements in the Andes do not merely demand cultural recognition within existing political frameworks, but instead unsettle the foundational distinction between Nature and Humanity upon which modern politics has historically depended. Drawing on ethnographic encounters with Quechua ritual specialists and political actors such as Mariano and Nazario Turpo, de la Cadena demonstrates that entities conventionally classified as “nature” — mountains, rivers, landscapes, or Pachamama — participate actively in political life as sentient beings endowed with agency, affective force, and relational obligations. These earth-beings exceed the epistemological limits of liberal multiculturalism because they cannot be translated fully into either environmental discourse or symbolic belief. Central to her intervention is the concept of cosmopolitics, borrowed from Isabelle Stengers, through which politics becomes not the exclusive negotiation among human subjects, but a field composed of partially connected worlds whose ontological assumptions are irreducibly heterogeneous. De la Cadena therefore rejects the universalism of modern political theory, particularly the Hobbesian and liberal separation of scientific nature from political society, arguing that this distinction historically enabled colonial forms of exclusion that rendered Indigenous worlds unintelligible except as superstition or cultural residue. A paradigmatic illustration appears in the political mobilisations against mining projects surrounding Ausangate and Cerro Quilish, where local communities opposed extractive capitalism not solely because of ecological destruction or economic dispossession, but because mining threatened relational worlds in which mountains themselves sustain life and demand reciprocal care. Particularly significant is her use of the notion of equivocation, derived from Eduardo Viveiros de Castro, to explain how terms such as “land,” “nature,” or “environment” simultaneously connect and separate divergent ontological worlds without resolving their differences into a single universal reality. The enduring significance of de la Cadena’s work resides in its demonstration that the contemporary crisis of politics is also an ontological crisis: a confrontation between a singular modern world and a pluriverse composed of multiple, partially connected realities struggling for legitimate existence within the horizons of late liberal governance.