Last updated 09/07/24: Online ordering is currently unavailable due to technical issues. We apologise for any delays responding to customers while we resolve this. For further updates please visit our website: https://www.cambridge.org/news-and-insights/technical-incident
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 February 2009
Many studies of Latin American elites are compilations of biographical sketches. These increase understanding of various personalities, but tend to be unsystematic and unrelated. Frequently, no attempt is made to draw the data together into meaningful generalizations about elite background, recruitment, behavior, and the like. Many other studies that take a group approach also concern elites but often this is not explicitly recognized by the author. Much of the literature on the Latin American military falls into this category.2
1 For examples, see Alexander, Robert J., Prophets of the Revolution (New York, Macmillan, 1962),Google Scholar and Davis, Harold E., Makers of Democracy in Latin America (New York, H. W. Wilson Co., 1945).Google Scholar
2 For example, Johnson, John J., The Military and Society in Latin America (Stanford, Stanford University Press, 1964).Google Scholar
3 Merle, Kling, A Mexican Interest Group in Action (Englewood Cliffs, Prentice-Hall, 1961).Google Scholar
4 Seymour, Martin Lipset and Aldo, Solari (eds.), Elites in Latin America (New York, Oxford University Press, 1967).Google Scholar
5 Kalman, Silvert, ‘ Political Leadership and Institutional Weakness in Argentina ’, in The Conflict Society (New York, American Universities Field Staff, 1966);Google ScholarArnold, Payne, ‘ Peru: Latin America's Silent Revolution‘, Inter-American Economic Affairs, 20 (Winter 1966), pp. 69–78;Google ScholarJames, D. Cochrane, ‘ Mexico's “New Científicos”: the Díaz Ordaz Cabinet ’, Current History, 21 (Summer 1967), pp. 61–72.Google Scholar
6 Wendell, Bell, Jamaican Leaders: Political Attitudes in a New Nation (Berkeley, Univ. of California Press, 1964).Google Scholar Two other works on West Indian leaders are Charles, Moskos, The Sociology of Political independence (Cambridge, Mass., Schenkmann, 1967),Google Scholar and Ivar, Oxaal, Black intellectuals Come to Power: The Rise of Creole Nationalism in Trinidad an Tobago (Cambridge, Mass., Schenkmann, 1968).Google Scholar
7 Daniel, Goldrich, Sons of the Establishment: Elite Youth in Panama and Costa Rica (Chicago, Rand McNally & Co., 1966).Google Scholar
8 Since Goldrich wrote his book the survey has again been repeated in Panama: Brown, Douglas A., The Political Orientations of Panamanian Students: A Republication (unpublished thesis, Chapel Hill, Univ. of North Carolina, 1967).Google Scholar
9 For Bell's s&ling and administering techniques, see pp. 7 and 8 of Jamaican Leaders.
10 Frank, Bonilla, The Failure of Elites (Cambridge, Mass., MIT Press, 1970), p. 54.Google Scholar
11 Ibid., p. 62.
12 Ibid., p. 322.
13 Needler, Martin C., ‘ Political Development and Military Intervention in Latin America ’, American Political Science Review, 9 (09 1966), p. 616.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14 Rosendo, Gómez, ‘Latin American Executives: Essence and Variations ’, Journal of Inter- American Studies, 3 (06 1961), pp. 81–96.Google Scholar
15 Leo, Lott, ‘ Executive Power in Venezuela ’, American Political Science Review, 1 (06 1956), pp. 422–41.Google Scholar
16 Martin, Needler, ‘ Cabinet Responsibility in a Presidential System: The Case of Peru ’ Parliamentary Affairs, 18 (Spring, 1965), pp. 156–61.Google Scholar
17 Alexander, Edelmann, Latin American Government and Politics (Homewood, The Dorsey Press, 1965), pp. 393–427.Google Scholar
18 Busey, James L., ‘ The Presidents of Costa Rica ‘, The Americas, 18 (07 1961), pp. 55–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
19 Gray, Richard B. and Kirwin, Frederick R., ‘ Presidential Succession in Chile: 1817–1966’, Journal of Inter-American Studies, 11 (01 1969), pp. 744–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
20 See Table I for a list of presidents. This study concerns the Mexican presidents to 1970.
21 The turnover rate is much greater than the total number of presidents indicates. Ten presidents occupied the office two or more times. Gómez Faroías, for ex&le, was president for a total of about 9 months, but was in office on five different occasions. Santa Anna was the chief executive II times, more than any other Mexican president.
22 See Table 2. In all of the tables the letter c will be used to refer to civilian, m to denote professional /dier, and m/i to indicate military insurgent. Military insurgent refers to individuals who began their career as guerrilla /Fdiers or with irregular forces rather than with the standing army. Of course, irregular forces were usually formed to fight against the regular army.
23 See Table 3.
24 The State of Mexico and the Federal District, i.e., Mexico City, are treated as a single unit because the only president from Mexico State, Adolfo López Mateos, was raised in a town on the outskirts of Mexico City. All his formal education was inside the city itself. See Appendix I for a listing of the states and towns of presidents.
25 See Appendix II for a list of states in each region.
26 See Table 5 for the percentage of the total population represented by each category. It is interesting to compare this finding with that of Donald, Matthews in U.S. Senators and Their World (New York, Random House, 1960).Google Scholar He found the small and medium sized town (2,500 to 50,000) to be consistently over-represented as a senatorial birth place. Rural, and metropolitan areas were under-represented, pp. 14–77.Google Scholar
27 Cline, , The U.S. and Mexico, p. 436.Google Scholar
28 For a discussion of basic means to power, see Stokes, William S., ‘ Violence as a Power Factor in Latin American Politics ’, Western Political Quarterly (09 1952), pp. 445–69.Google Scholar
29 A similar analysis of modes of attaining power and executive age indicates that no relationship exists. The same is true of means for achieving power and area and size of birthplace.
30 This distinction is based largely upon Robert, Scott, ‘ Political Elites and Political Modernization: the Crisis of Transition ’, Lipset, and /Fari, (eds.), Elites in Latin America, pp. 120–1. Scott distinguishes between functional and political elites. Here the terms are changed so that they relate more directly to the distinction being made.Google Scholar
