Top-Rated Free Essay

Latin American Politics Study Guide

Topics: Social class, Working class, Democracy, Political party, Neoliberalism, Liberal democracy / Pages: 23 (5164 words) / Published: May 2nd, 2014
This form of government has proven the most stable, having the most stable governments in the world
a. B-A
b. presidentialism
c. parliamentarism
d. socialist republic wait what’s the answer? is it d? just think of examples presidentialism is like venezuela or the US she has said there are not that many presidential systems socialist republic is like china or the USSR not very stable so its C
OP here, yes it’s C. Think of the big huge list of different types of systems where parliament had the long list.

This charismatic but controversial leader attempted a coup in 1992 and then got elected to the presidency, rewriting the constitution to give himself more power
a. Correa
b. Allende
c. Chavez
d. George Bush


I am more worried about essay questions though.

40 MC and ~8-10 SA did she say what the SA topics are likely to be on?? and how many names are we expected to know? i think main ppl involved in venezuela, colombia and argentina

Venezuela--Chavez, Maduro vs. student protesters
Colombia-- maybe just national front and 1991 constitution
Argentina-- Peron
Chile- Allende, Pinochet, Chicago Boys
→ allende (socialist) then coup giving rise to pinochet (B.A regime) then loss to Aylwin (Democracy again, 1990) pinochet’s coup was supported by the US, as allende’s socialist state worried Nixon about a red scare in LA anything on cuba?
Probably knowing about Fidel’s Coup, succession by his brother, and recent moves to allow more travel in and out of Cuba….
**I’m pretty sure on the exam there will be a question about US-LA relationships and you should use Cuba as the main example.

This website really helped explain the difference between liberalism and democracy! Hope it helps thanks brah brah HISTORICAL CONTEXT
Colonization and colonial society
mercantilism: Exported goods back to the crown
Shaped by Spanish and Portuguese for gold and silver and other raw materials colonial economies oriented towards exports produced with forced labor--mercantilism
Portuguese brought 4 million slaves to Brazil--race politics imports limiting development of local craftspeople
Power consolidated in the crown overseas with local governors to oversee day to day affairs no access to power for indigenous people problem of maintenance of control over local elites: make sure resources flowed back to the crown crown designed an elaborate bureaucracy headed in Spain (Council of the Indies) creation of viceroyalties: one in Mexico, one in Peru tension between crown and people in New World
The various social classes:
Slaves/Indentured servants Strict hierarchies according to power, wealth and ethnicity: peninsulares > criollos > mestizos > mulattos > indigenous > African/slaves
central role of the Church: religious mission of colonization very close relationship between church and state ambiguous role of priests: sometimes big defenders of rights of indigenous people (Fray Bartolome de las Casas)--educate and assimilate, more often, they were more involved in forced conversion created eclectic mix of religious traditions with a dominating Spanish culture
By 1600, important changes eroded Spain’s hold on colonies population shift to working class more active role of creoles in economy
Struggle for independence
The movements in each country
The leaders (criollo v. mestizo)- peninsulares vs. criollos
Rise of the Mestizos
Mesitzos saw wars as an opportunity to rise in social class
Haciendas (large estates that functioned on debt)--sharecropping
Attempts by Spanish crown to tighten control (Bourbonic Reforms, intendentes)--added levels to Bureaucratic Structure increased power of peninsulares affected the power of the Church: church and crown authorities
1808--French Empire expands w/ Napoleon, his brother Joseph holds Spanish crown--Criollos decide not to recognize Joseph as a governmental authority-revolt, wars from 1810-1825 Legacies of colonialism:
Economy: devastation by war, interruption of trade, new markets of UK and US, government borrowing abroad begins foreign debt; still failure to promote domestic industrialization
Politics: power vacuum (military caudillos), centralization of power,dictatorships (strongmen, not general consensus); much political instability
Society: colonial class stratification continues, criollos became the powerful group, high land/wealth concentration; no gains for middle/lower classes- limited acceptance of mestizos by elite
Culture-struggles with church power: struggle over role of Catholic Church: secularism/separatism vs. Catholicism as official religion and control over civil registry/schools/etc.; Church still major power, i.e. major landowner; struggle between Conservatives and Liberals

Economic Development: how does a society organize to produce wealth?
Three Models in LA:
Export/Import: late 1820s early 1920s based on exports of raw materials and import of manufactured goods inspired by the doctrine of economic liberalism (laissez-faire)/comparative advantage division of labor--unequal societal hierarchy (prosperity for a group of small elites) foreign investment in trade, banking
ISI (Import Substitution Industrialization) (Stage 1)
ISI: a trade and economic policy based on the premise that a country should attempt to reduce its foreign dependency through the local production of industrialized products. economic crises bring about change in the economy, changes who is in power power shift after 1929 crash promotion of domestic industrialization
WWII further strengthened ISI; quick expansion of industry led to an increase in wages and benefits incentive to incorporate the working class into politics (populist coalitions) (Popular Front)
Mexico- sectors represented in governing party (PRI)
Argentina: govt as final arbiter between business and labor (Peronism) catch up: subsidized cost of starting up industries protect local industry--tariffs/quotas state as promoter of capital formation: tax breaks, loans, subsidies
State investment in and nationalization of infrastructure
ISI (Stage 2) industrial output increased 6x unemployment becomes a huge issue crisis of ISI no room to expand market, high cost of capital goods, bad for working class changes in the socioeconomic structure of the state; growth of a new industrial elite & working class grew
Led by Bureaucratic Authoritarian regimes
debt crisis motivated economic change private banks lend vast amounts to developing countries (petrodollars) although a lot of money was going into LA via loans, credit lines, bonds, etc., a lot of money was not staying there because of capital flight
Chicago boys in Chile as catalyst they criticized ISI policies
Emphasized liberal economics
Washington Consensus
LA governments should support private sector by reducing the economic role of the state liberalize policies on trade focus on long term investments in health, education, and infrastructural development get rid of the deficit, get rid of inflation, account balance was negative bc of ISI
Bolivia: poverty and hyperinflation bc of ISI

Identify similarities and differences between economic models (logic of each model)

Export-Import Model
ISI: Import Substitution Industrialization
Neoliberal Model
-late 1800s early 1900s

-export of raw materials, import of industrial/finished goods

-large investment in LA nations by industrialized/”Western” states

-stimulated growth in raw material sector

-Liberalism (laissez-faire)

-emphasis on stability and social control: political stability = attractive investment → economic growth

impact: appearance of growth of the middle class→ organization/unionization; major shift in the working class due to imported labor and immigration; political reforms
-decrease foreign dependency through domestic industrialization

-based on nationalism and the UN’s Economic Commission for LA (ECLAC)

-goal: economic independence and job creation

-took advantage of Great Depression and WWII

-govt. restricted competition through tariffs/quotas, encouraged local investments through credits/loans, stimulated domestic demand through public sector expenditures and took direct involvement through the formation of state-owned companies

-impact: short-term success/growth but instability in the long-run
-manufactured inferior products that were more expensive; consumers lost; workers gained importance

-creation of Populist regimes which were authoritarian and represented class interests

-rise of Bureaucratic-Authoritarianism
-response to ISI crisis; a reversal of ISI policies

-promoted privatization of economy and economic stabilization

-policies: control balance of payments and inflation by cutting govt. spending; structural adjustment- liberalization, privatization

impact: mixed results across LA; increased foreign investment; stagnation of economic growth; inequality and poverty; job creation in the informal sector

Social consequences: how did society change?
Export/Import: creation of modern elite (entrepreneurial), middle class, urbanization, working class, co-optative democracies
ISI: urbanization, inequality, growth of industrial bourgeoisie, working class grows; limited domestic market growth as there was a growth for traditional markets
2nd stage of isi had a balance of payments crisis (higher priced imports and lower priced exports)
Neoliberalism: a lot of the jobs were created in the informal sector (no employment security, work security, etc) these workers did not pay taxes suffer from great inequality; poverty also increased minimum social protection
Political consequences: how are they linked to different types of political systems?
Import/Export: Oligarchy limited participation small elite
ISI (Stage 1): Populism direct appeal of leader to masses (Peron in Argentina) legitimacy of the leader was based on charisma, nationalist ideas and appeals to social justice
ISI (Stage 2): Bureaucratic Authoritarianism military authoritarian response because of poor economic conditions repression of labor and the left; reduction of political activity narrow support base because the collective power of the working class was seen as a threat
Neoliberalism: Democracy? free and fair elections (more radical reformers improved their democracy scores more) mandate from the people outlier: Pinochet's dictatorship in Chile shock therapy: Bolivia--all policies at once, worsening poverty/inequality ends dependency theory by setting a balanced government budget, no borrowing from the central bank, no more price controls hyperinflation undermined the beliefs that the economic changes were positive gradual reform: 2-3 year period of implementing policies, better for standard of living higher and more radical levels of liberalization are associated with higher levels of inequality and poverty Democratic Development: How does a society organize to solve ‘political’ problems?
Identify different types of political rule
How are Economic and Democratic development tied? Why are they linked?

First stage ISI
Second Stage ISI
Bureaucratic Authoritarianism
Democracy/Turn Left

Export Import Model

- A lot of foreign investment (to create jobs)
-export goods that have comparative advantage; import goods that are inefficient to make
-ended due to the Great Depression/Black Tuesday/Wall Street Market Crash of 1929 (less need for resources, b/c demand decreased and did not have enough money to import) -carry over from colonial days; similar to mercantilism
-tariffs: to help export more than they were importing to strengthen the elites (the market)
- Laissez faire and free markets, comparative advantage, etc
-Agricultural elites incorporate technology
-Greater inequalities led to the transformation of ISI politics
-Urbanization of the working class and a growing middle class
-Limited participation (oligarchy control)
-Oligarchic dem.
-Well educated middle class sought political participation Import Substitution Industrialization
[1st stage: 1930s-1960s]
[2nd stage: 1960-1980]
-Desire for autonomy and self-determination in the global market (didn’t want to be vulnerable anymore).
-Could only be politically sovereign if they were economically independent as well
-Protectionist (protect LA markets from foreign markets; end dependence on foreign markets (European) aka self-reliance
-industrialize (create products/industries from beginning to end) - Producing manufactured goods they used to import from other countries (mostly light/non-durable manufactured goods such as t-shirts)
-Less exports
-Protect markets with trade barriers, subsidies, & tariffs
-Increase infrastructure
-State can be used as a tool in shaping comparative advantage -Capital intensive, not labor intensive leads to high joblessness
-Shift away from agriculture to industry
- Creation of basic consumer goods -benefits for the working class: social and political benefits, higher wages, health care, allowed to unionize, (incentives for incorporation of working class into populist coalition (1st stage)
-(2nd stage) rights taken away; military control of the state, high cost of capital goods, austere economic policies that de-emphasize concessions to workers
-Populism (still authoritarian; 1st stage)
(ex: Peron in Argentina, Fujimori in Peru)
-Bureaucratic Authoritarianism (2nd stage)
-response to ISI crisis
-rejection and reversal of ISI policy
-emphasis on economic stability and structural changes through spending cuts and privatization
-spending cuts
-removal of govt. from economy and business

-increased inequality and poverty
-little/no economic growth
-increased foreign investment
-job creation in informal sector


Democracy in Latin America
Types of rule:
Democracy- when national leaders acquired or held office as a result of free and fair elections; open competition for support among a substantial portion of the adult population
Semi-democracy- leaders who come to power through elections that are free but not fair; when only one candidate had any reasonable prospect of winning, or when elected leaders were obliged to share effective power with or cede it to unelected groups
Oligarchy- when electoral competition was essentially fair but not free; candidates were dominant elites; suffrage restricted to a very small percentage of the adult population
Non-democracy- years of military coups, chronic instability, caudillo politics, dictatorial rule
Trend over time
Two broad types of change: transition via rupture (ruptura), a complete and usually sudden and violent break with the authoritarian past more likely after a personalistic regime transition via reforms (reforma), a process of give and take negotiation between incumbents and dissidents typical after one party or military regime in LA (waves). There were 3 broad cycles of democratic change in south America: First was from 19th century to 1939, dominated by oligarchic competition. An era of oligarchic domination through electoral means elites granted modest shares of power to the rising middle class but not to the working class lasted until the onset of the Great depression and led to the onset of populist regimes free and fair elections (more radical reformers improved their democracy scores more) mandate from the people outlier: Pinochet's dictatorship in Chile shock therapy: Bolivia--all policies at once, worsening poverty/inequality ends dependency theory by setting a balanced government budget, no borrowing from the central bank, no more price controls hyperinflation undermined the beliefs that the economic changes were positive gradual reform: 2-3 year period of implementing policies, better for standard of living higher and more radical levels of liberalization are associated with higher levels of inequality and poverty
Second was from 1940-77 and it was marked by the partial rise and near complete demise of electoral democracy. Early 70s saw a rise of brutal and invasive military interventions in Brazil, Argentina, Chile and Uruguay. a lot of autocracies during this time socioeconomic development led to demands for political inclusion economic stagnation led to social tension and class conflict
Third began in the late 70s and last until the late 90s. by 1998 there were no more autocratic regimes democracies were taking over
Three waves of democratization in the world Long wave (1828-1926) Followed by Reverse wave (1922-42) Democracy in US and Europe
Emergence of nation states In LA: Argentina, Chile, Colombia and Uruguay (limited experiments) Reverse wave 1922-1943 (Franco in Spain, Mussolini in Italy) Short wave (1943-62) began with WWII. Followed by reverse wave (1958-75) began in WWII (Gemany, Italy, Japan) In LA: Costa Rica, Venezuela, Bolivia, Brazil, Peru, Ecuador Followed by reverse wave, bureaucratic authoritarian regimes from 1958-1975 (Chile 1973, Argentina in 1966 and 1976, Brazil in 1964, Uruguay in 1973)
Third wave (1974-90) Began with the overthrow of the Portuguese dictatorship in 1974 Moved to southern Europe and Latin America Re-democratization of Chile (90), Argentina (83), Brazil (89), Uruguay (85), Dominican Republic (78)
How do transitions happen? economic development (Modernization Theory: Lipsett)--idea that in order to have a country move towards a democratic path, it is imperative to ensure economic growth--economic growth leads to democracy because economic growth allows for a creation of a middle class, which will demand more rights and protections for society expansion of trade, neoliberal policies, policy recommendations by IMF and World Bank social forces? (role of elites, middle and working class)
1900-39: elites pushed for partial reforms that excluded the working class; repression was easier
1940-70: reforms pushed by middle classes but not always sided with workers success depended on who they sided with (elites/military restricted democracy) economic crisis led to the middle class turning to authoritarian solutions
1978-2000: role of working class was mixed pressure from workers helped (Peru, Argentina, Chile) in other countries’ business interests played a more important role (mexico) snowball effect→ spread to neighbors
Political forces authoritarian hardliners want to maintain the regime without change while authoritarian reformers are willing to accept substantial changes democratic moderates are intent on democratization even at the price of power sharing while democratic radicals are against bargaining and want a full democracy

Starting Point: institutional military institutional civilian
debt crisis debt crisis
Social Forces: protest middle class
negotiations led to concessions: constitution negotiations led to concessions: fair elections
reforma: negotiated transition
1980 constitution, referendum 1988, 1989 reforma: negotiated transition
2000 elections, 3rd wave of democracy

***Transitions in Chile and Mexico ppt’s will help you*** (3/3 and 3/5 lecture)

Institutional alternatives: presidential or parliamentary observation: most stable democracies are parliamentary in a presidential system the chief exec. is the head of government and head of state separately elected president and legislature; the cabinet is named and dismissed by the president (president has fixed term so more stability; but that president can be bad- ex.

separate survival: legislature can’t remove president (only under extreme circumstances) and president can’t dissolve legislature separate elections make gridlock possible (different parties) no incentives for coalition building separation of power and checks and balances: less chance of an authoritarian government in a parliamentary system the head of state is usually a monarch /and the head of government is the prime minister parliament is popularly elected and then selects the executive (PM) from the cabinet legislature can dissolve PM and cabinet with a vote of no confidence; less gridlock because of this separate survival doesn’t exist here; separate origin on the other hand does more flexible; creation of coalitions (allows for the representation of minority groups) Presidential regimes entail a separation of powers and parliamentary regimes represent a fusion of powers
Ironically, countries usually adopt presidential systems in hopes of having strong governments, but executive-legislative gridlock actually tends to make them weak
Varieties of Presidentialism
How much power to give to the executive varies across LA
Proactive—allows the president to set policies (decrees; Argentina and Brazil) versus reactive—to block policies (veto; most LA countries with presidents have this power)
Strong presidents: Decrees allowed in Argentina (94), Brazil, Colombia, Ecuador, and Peru Weak presidents: Mexico, costa rica, Venezuela pre-chavez
Other sources of partisan power
Degree to which the presidents party rules legislature
Mexico—president has very weak constitutional powers but the president has very strong political party affiliation so his party controlled the legislature—can’t make decrees but can get legislature to pass their ideas.
Brazil—presidents have strong presidential powers but have weak partisan powers, typically elected with very weak mandate (30% of vote). A lot of parties that are very undisciplined so they can’t get majority—so that means they do everything by decree.
·America—really weak constitutionally with domestic policy (powerful with international policy but that’s typical with most presidential systems), partisan powers are pretty weak too, they don’t have control over their party but the party controls them; decree powers are more able to touch more areas (so executive orders aren’t really effective)
Plurality versus majority runoff
Plurality (Mexico, CR, Paraguay, Venezuela): Weak mandate (Allende in Chile with 36.5%)
Bad idea here because they have so many parties Majority runoff (Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Nicaragua): Strong mandate; small parties; centrist policies
To avoid multiparty presidential system (doesn’t let someone win with less than 30% of the vote)
Creates a threshold so that someone has a higher vote percentage
How to define (enhance) role of the legislature
Concern about divided government
Multi Party conflicts prove to be problematic
Organize elections to represent more people but avoid pitfalls of too many parties?
Ensure stable parties that represent something
How do you elect the legislature?
Single member district: In the district so many people run, but there is one seat and the person with the most votes wins; equal political weight in each district
System in US: Encourages two parties (hard for a third party to win) so there is coalescence—less representation though so there are less diverse interests being represented; but more efficient
Proportional representation: Each district has more than one seat, percentage of votes turns to percentage of seats makes more than one seat; proportional to population Most common in LA (Argentina, Brazil, Costa Rica, Uruguay, etc.)
Encourages more representation because small third parties can run and get one or two seats without getting 50% of the vote Allows smaller parties that represent narrower interests
Mixed systems (compromise)
Efficiency of single member district and the representation from the proportional representation
México, Venezuela, Bolivia
Reelection/term limits
Reelection? Legislatives doesn’t stay long because they’re not very well paid, don’t really like it, want a higher up more well paid job, etc.
Does not exist in Mexico and Costa Rica (prohibited immediate reelection, have to sit out a term, so very little reelection) Representation of women: some places require a quota for women to have seats in the house
If laws work the quota should be pretty high (population is about 50% female), placement mandate should exist too—and this defines the success of the law. With a PR election the way the person goes to congress is decided is through lists so each party gives a list. Party A has a list “John, Bill, Nathan, Graham, etc… 40.” Seats are reserved, but women are the last number seats so when PR, the party places first 4 people but women are all at the end. Also typically very lax enforcement of quota laws
Basically, quota laws only work if there is a placement mandate
How to strengthen political parties CAN SOMEONE HELP WITH THIS ONE??! define stability
number of parties (“effective”) association with legislative majorities institutionalization of party system stable base support roots in society perception among population important because: promotes programmatic parties not clientelistic makes accountability possible reduces anti-system options weak institutions → more corruption
Are Latin American countries democratic? political rights-elections and voting civil rights and liberties - complementary rights that are guaranteed by a constitution or bill of rights
Liberal democracies combine free and fair elections with the full employment of citizens rights (United States) have checks and balances constitutionally protected and equally enforced civil rights and liberties universal suffrage
Illiberal democracies are free but not really fair elections (they place a competitor); partial denial of civil liberties to citizens (Colombia, Ecuador, Venezuela, Mexico, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua) universal suffrage limited protection of civil rights and liberties; gov’t violates rights because there are no checks on the government semi-democracies (same as an electoral democracy) have leaders who came to power through elections that were free but not fair; when only one candidate had any reasonable prospect of winning, or when elected leaders were obliged to share effective power with or cede it to nonelected groups
Quality of democracy has not improved over time… even though there might be an increase in democracies oil rents hinder democracy and distort development
“Rentier effect”- By taxing less and spending more the money relieves the pressure for political accountability
“Repression effect”- funds for internal security retard democratization (create a political force that stops citizen pushes for democracy)
“Modernization effect”- oil based growth doesn’t lead to more education/specialization (the wrong kind of growth)
Latin American Countries:
*timeline for each, main features of each political regime, other factors (social, economic, etc.)
*Are they democratic? Why or why not? (security, inclusion, limits to authority, political competition, etc.)
Argentina- case of breakdown in the 1980s; contemporary democratic more info?? -
Colombia→ unstable political system has created a somewhat illiberal democracy, but there isn’t a rise of one certain leader state is unable to guarantee security of its citizens
National Front (restriction of competition) because of a bipartisan regime; restored civilian rule and ended violence (period of La Violencia and bogotazo riots) while limiting participation and creating new forms of violence in the country via guerillas; also had fragmented parties post 1991 constitution there was a restriction of civil rights as non state actors (guerillas, drug cartels) have grown in strength
Ecuador--rise and solidification of an illiberal democracy, illiberal leader (Correa) has tried to obtain as much power as possible without being classified as an authoritarian leader appealed to politically excluded groups; high levels of poverty and inequality institutional instability since 1930 (13 military coups, 21 different constitutions)
Rafael Correa promised a new constitution; elected in 2006 and helped create a new constitution with 444 articles idea of the good life, rights of nature (ecosystems should thrive; natural resources, islands, amazon) free and fair elections; attacks on freedom of the press; criminalization of protest; hyperpresidentialism (huge increase in presidential power over the state), no check on the executive; congress serves as a rubber stamp) ← illiberal democracy
10. Brazil--racism/racial inequality; affirmative action, quotas by government to attempt to fix last country in LA to abolish slavery during the early 20th it had a whitening policy
1960-80s racial democracy and military rule
1985 return to electoral democracy saw government move away from promotion of a racial democracy
1988 constitution made racism a crime subject to imprisonment
Cardoso, as president in 1995, promoted affirmative action and quotas race is not just about skin color in Brazil. education and gender also affect perceptions of race
Venezuela--example of trend to the left, evolution of neoliberalism, shaped the new political movement--protest, limits to authority
3/31 lecture
Chavez became president in 1999; he wanted to change the constitution from previous regimes and write a new one; he wanted to eliminate institutional checks on the executive executive strengthened- term lengthened legislature weakened- one chamber congress (senate eliminated) judicial branch- formally independent but not really crowding out the opposition- opposition boycotted 2005 election
Maduro (VP) became interim president in march 2013 after chavez death; narrowly won election in april 2013 government is repressing protesters (middle upper class)- President Maduro has deployed disproportionate coercive force against the students, relying on official military groups as well as unofficial, non uniformed paramilitaries who ride around on motorcycles intimidating protesters and bystanders currently there is rising inflation, shortage of basic products, a security crisis (very dangerous), and a lot of corruption government has been repressive instead of trying to meet the students half way
Cuba--how has the US’s interest in Latin America (Cuba) changed things? What does the US think about when interacting with Cuba?
US had an economic interest in Cuba (sugar); Cubans didn’t like that foreign industries in the country signed a trade agreement that allowed Cuba to sell in the US for the cheapest price
US foreign policy interest focused on Cuba as they sided with the USSR; USSR helped them and Cuba lived off of the Soviet block; all came to a crisis in 1962 with the Cuban missile crisis
Mexico--PRI loses an election after many years of being in power, actually turning into a democracy--liberal steps
2000 was the change in Mexico; set the legacy of party change
PRI (Institutional Revolutionary Party) shaped Mexico’s current system
“Turn to Left”: in response to neoliberal economic policies implemented after the fall of ISI; new type of government attempts to aid previously marginalized groups (between 2002-2009)
Two stages:
De-politicization: demobilize organized labor & peasants; move away from neoliberal programs
Re-politicization: workers are mobilized, creation of a new social contract between the government leaders and the workers’ groups response to SAP (Structural Adjustment Programs) performance failures and the subsequent grievances that have accumulated over time
Different types of resistance Formed by established political parties
Marxist/socialist roots
Established Populist Machine Parties (ex: Argentina [PJ] , Peru [APRA])
Post-Revolutionary Parties (ex: Nicaragua [FSLN] , El Salvador [FMLN])
New Political Movements (ex: Venezuela [MVR/PSUV], Ecuador [Alianza PAIS], and Bolivia [MAS])
Types of Left Parties
Established Parties with Marxists/Socialist Roots
Process of moderation/commitment to democracy
Reforms implemented by center or conservative forces, allowing left parties to articulate opposition around social deficits
Established Populist Machine Parties
Led to big changes in party system
Neoliberal reforms were implemented by populist leaders
Lead to big changes in party system
Realignment in Argentina
Collapse in Peru
Established Post-Revolutionary Parties
New Political Movements
Based on the opposition of the neoliberal reforms
Articulated widespread social discontent
Contributed/reflected collapse of traditional parties
More radical/nationalistic versions of socialist/Marxist tradition
Venezuela- movement from above; based off of chavez who organized people around his movement
Ecuador- mixed; indigenous support but increasing opposition; personalist
Bolivia- rooted in social mobilization from below; ties to social groups and demands
What drives US policy toward Latin America?
Different types of interests:
Economic- particularly sugar- US had high demand- Reciprocal Trade agreement allowed Cuba to sell sugar in the US for 25% less than anywhere else
National Security- Cuba basically wanted to avoid invasion by the U.S., and the U.S. wanted to prevent Soviet Union from being allies with Cuba → The Platt Amendment made Cuba a protectorate of the US which said that the US could take over whenever. contain communist influence in the world (LA was very vulnerable to it) economic aid, renewed military intervention and covert operations to prevent communist influences from taking over (esp. Cuba) support for right wing dictators which contributed to repressive dictatorships in South America (Chile) and revolutions/civil wars in Central america immigration, drugs, gangs, and terrorism are new security threats; US gives a lot of military, police, economic and social aid to benefit its interests (esp. Colombia and mexico)
political implications of integration prejudice towards Latino population
B. Economic Imperative
1.1880-1934: “Dollar Diplomacy” a) Growing penetration of U.S. b) Solution to economic depression at home: expand market to LA - From molasses → raw materials → oil
2. 1933-45: Good neighbor Policy (FDR Renounces military intervention in LA) A) Cooperation and trade rather than military force B) Great Depression led to inward-looking military force
C) However...geopolitical competition during WWII search for access to raw material during war D) Protection of profits
C. Security Interests
1. 1823: Monroe Doctrine (America for the Americans) - 1811: “No Transfer Resolution”
2. Geographic significance of region would become more symbolic

Guest Speaker: Brazil Race and Representation
7 times as many slaves as US
1888s -slavery ends
1930-50s -Racial democracy
"whitening" policy government subsidized white European immigrants
1951-racism illegal by Afonso Arinos law
1960s--80s -military rule says there is no racism
1985 -electoral democracy returns, move away from promotion of “racial democracy”
1990s-2000s -President Cardoso says Brazil is racist, promotes affirmative action and quotas
Color vs race
Whites have more higher education than browns or blacks
Race and gender related
2010 elections:
Afro-Brazilian Green Party woman candidate got 19.4%
Workers' Party woman wins to become first female
50% Quota system in Public University to get poor/minorities. help solve inequality.
Even though there aren’t any distinct race lines, there are distinct class lines - the class line is unavoidable

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • American Politics Study Guide
  • Latin American Politics Finals
  • American National Politics Study Guide
  • Study Guide Latin America
  • Latin America Study Guide
  • American Politics & Government Midterm Study Guide
  • Contemporary Latin American Studies
  • Latin American Culture
  • American Politics
  • Latin American Independence