The sequencing of transitions to democracy and to a market economy shaped the outcome of labor law reform and prospects for expanded labor rights in Argentina, Brazil, and Chile. Argentina and Brazil experienced democratic transitions before market economic reforms were consolidated in the 1990s. During the transition, unions obtained prolabor reforms and secured rights that were enshrined in labor law. In posttransition democratic governments, market reforms coincided with efforts to reverse earlier labor protections. Unable to block many harmful reforms, organized labor in Argentina and Brazil did conserve core interests linked to organizational survival and hence to future bargaining leverage. In Chile this sequence was reversed. Market economic policies and labor reform were consolidated under military dictatorship. During democratic transition, employers successfully resisted reforms that would expand labor rights. This produced a limited scope of organizational resources for Chilean unions and reduced prospects for future improvements.

Despite major attempts by the three governments of the post-Pinochet era, the promised reform of the labor legislation inherited from the military regime remains essentially incomplete. This study attempts to explain why, and addresses some of the consequences of this delay for Chilean organized labor, examining particularly the variables of consensus politics and employer concessions.

The election of Hugo Chávez as Venezuela's president in 1998, less than seven years after his unsuccessful military coup attempt, marked a pivotal moment in one of the most dramatic political transformations in the nation's history. This article explores public reaction to Chávez's shift, especially the question of why Venezuelans would entrust democratic governance to a man who had once attempted to topple the nation's democratic regime. Two hypotheses are proposed: one of converted militancy and one of democratic ambivalence. Analysis of survey data from 1995 and 1998 demonstrates that Chávez's initial base of support drew heavily on Venezuelans who were ambivalent or hostile toward democracy. By 1998, and consistent with the converted militant hypothesis, Chávez won support from a substantial portion of citizens who valued democracy. Yet democratic ambivalence also contributed to Chávez's winning electoral coalition.

Based primarily on declassified U. S. government documents, this study analyzes the U. S. effort to build a “showcase for democracy” in Guatemala following the U. S.-engineered regime change of 1954. The effort was doomed, for the U.S. government lacked both unity of purpose and the necessary continuous commitment at the top. The documents also demonstrate limited consideration of the sociopolitical constraints that U. S. policy objectives would face. This is clear from examining three key U. S. objectives: to eliminate the “communist threat”; to create a stable, legitimate, democratic government; and to develop a free, independent labor movement. Domination and the limits of power are equally central to understanding the relationship between the Eisenhower administration and Guatemala, a case study that also has more general utility.