Hostname: page-component-84b7d79bbc-2l2gl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-02T04:20:46.603Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Latin-American Executives: Essence and Variations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2018

R. A. Gómez
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The most widely-professed fact in the field of Latin American politics is unquestionably the dominant role of the president. The task facing Latin Americanists is not the defense of this theme but the elaboration of it. One of the most confining factors — so often lamented at conferences where these matters are discussed — is the lack of information in depth concerning all of the revelancies of power structure. This is particularly evident in appraising cultural factors although it must be admitted that much excellent work is now being done. A very challenging problem in the area of comparative government is involved, a problem admitting of some of the methodological uneasiness associated with that branch of political inquiry. Obviously, in the study of Latin American politics one may proceed with greater assurance with the “variations on a theme” technique than would be possible in many other areas; however, some disillusionment and appreciable inaccuracies lie in wait if one submits to this temptation too extensively.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Inter-American Studies , Volume 3 , Issue 1 , January 1961 , pp. 81 - 95
Copyright
Copyright © University of Miami 1961

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 For methodological problems, see “Research in Comparative Politics”, Roy Macridis and Richard Cox reporting for the Social Science Research Council's Interuniversity Research Seminar on Comparative Politics, American Political Science Review, Vol. XLVII, No. 3 (September, 1953), 641-57.

2 An excellent illustration of this technique: George L. Blanksten, “Political Groups in Latin America”, American Political Science Review, Vol. LIII, No. 1 (March, 1959), 106-27. Also, Fitzgibbon, Russell H., “The Party Potpourri in Latin America”, Western Political Quarterly, Vol. X, No. 1 (March, 1951), 3–22.Google Scholar

3 An Essay on the True Principles of Executive Power in the Great States, (London: Robinson, 1792), Vol. 1, p. 1.

4 Moses, Bernard, The Intellectual Background of the Revolution in South America 1810-1824 (New York: Hispanic Society of America, 1926)Google Scholar; Rydjord, John, Foreign Interest in the Independence of New Spain (Durham: Duke University Press, 1935)Google Scholar; Spell, Jefferson Rea, Rousseau in the Spanish World Before 1833 (Austin: University of Texas Press, 1938).Google Scholar

5 Quoted in Alberdi's, Juan Bautista Bases y puntos de partida para la organización política de la República Argentina (Buenos Aires: Ediciones Estrada, 1943), Vol. V, Clásicos Argentinos, p. 56.Google Scholar

6 Moses, Intellectual Background, pp. 155-6.

7 The Voyage of the Beagle (New York: Heritage Press, 1957), p. 116.

8 Rojas, Ricardo, El Pensamiento de Sarmiento (Buenos Aires: Editorial Losada, 1941), p. 190.Google Scholar

9 “The Development of Democracy on the American Continent”, American Political Science Review, Vol. XVI, No. 1 (February, 1922), p. 3.

10 For example: Adorno, T. W. et al. The Authoritarian Personality (New York: Harper and Brothers, 1950)Google Scholar; Metz, Harold William and Thompson, Charles A. H., Authoritarianism and the Individual (Washington: Brookings Institution, 1950)Google Scholar; Spitz, David, Patterns of Anti-Democratic Thought (New York: Macmillan, 1949).Google Scholar

11 Karl Loewenstein has effectively presented the case for differentiating Latin- American authoritarianism from totalitarianism, in the following: Brazil Under Vargas (New York: Macmillan, 1942), p. 450; letter to the New York Times, October 29, 1950, IV 8/5.

12 The use of the term “Iberian” excludes Haiti, technically speaking, but in practice Haiti may be assumed as falling into the pattern.

13 The term “revolution” is here intended to mean a genuine and drastic revolution such as the French Revolution or the Bolshevik Revolution, not the much milder application of that term to mean coup d'état.

14 Even with respect to the United States, there is often observed that a gap is to be found between commitment and consistency, such as the difference between theory and practice in some areas of civil rights.

15 Juan Bautista Alberdi, sometimes called the Madison of Argentina, seems to have appreciated this when he wrote: “Give to the executive power all power possible, but give it by means of a constitution.” Bases, p. 183.

16 The French are especially gifted in observing this in the United States during various periods: Crévecouer, de Tocqueville, and more recently Jacques Maritaln who in Reflections on America (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1958) entitles a chapter on this matter, “Deliverance From History”.

17 There have recently appeared a number of interesting reports by Richard W. Patch from Bolivia in the form of letters for the American Universities Field Staff Reports Service: “Bolivian Background” (October 10, 1958), “Bolivia: The

18 Fitzgibbon, Russell H., “Continuismo in Central America and the Caribbean”, Inter-American Quarterly, Vol. II, No. 3 (July, 1940), 55–74.Google Scholar

19 See the correlations in Fitzgibbon, Russell H., “A Statistical Evaluation of Latin-American Democracy”, Western Political Quarterly, Vol. IX, No. 3 (September, 1956), 607-19.Google Scholar

20 The fact that Uruguay has a conciliar executive does not, of course, affect this observation adversely.

21 It may be recalled that, in the last days of his administration when it was too late to be effective, Perón caused considerable consternation by threatening to arm the workers.

22 As an example with interesting similarities, see Khadduri, Majid, “The Role of the Military in Middle East Politics”, American Political Science Review, Vol. XLVII, No. 2 (June, 1953), 511-24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

23 Reported in the New York Times, October 31, 1948, 38/4.

24 (New York: Harper and Brothers, 1938), p. 232.

25 Alexander, Robert J., “The Army in Politics”, in Davis, Harold Eugene (ed.), Government and Politics in Latin America, Chapter 6, summarizes this wellGoogle Scholar