Taylor Boas’ book, Evangelicals and Electoral Politics in Latin America, delves into the profound transformations in the religious and political landscape of Latin America during the twentieth century. Evangelical groups have emerged and expanded, challenging the long-standing dominance of Catholicism. This trend is particularly notable in Brazil, where evangelical politicians have effectively harnessed this religious shift to gain political power, contrasting the more subdued political engagement of evangelicals in countries like Chile and Peru. Boas’ rigorous methodology and analysis address the crucial question: why have similar cultural shifts led to varying levels of evangelical political engagement across these countries?
Existing literature on the rise of evangelicalism in Latin America can be divided into two broad sets of research: one that investigates its causes, and another that explores its consequences. Altogether, they largely underscored the following narrative: shifts in religious beliefs, attitudes, and behaviors are largely influenced by socioeconomic factors, including poverty, state weakness, development indicators, urbanization, and migration patterns. This cultural shift has led to a political shift. This perspective posits that the political ascent of evangelical Christianity is, at its core, a cultural reaction to these socioeconomic changes. Boas’ work is mostly positioned within the broader scholarly debate that investigates the consequences of the evangelical rise in Latin America.
In his new research endeavor, Boas contends with institutional explanations, which broadly suggest that Brazil’s open-list proportional representation system, districts with larger magnitudes, and fragmented party system contribute to the higher number of evangelical politicians. He argues that this explanation is incomplete, as subnational variations, where institutional factors remain constant, show inconsistencies. Instead, Boas posits that the historical perception of threats to evangelicals’ existence has been a stronger motivator for evangelical political mobilization in Brazil compared to Chile and Peru.
In Brazil, the Catholic Church’s resistance to relinquishing its privileges after the monarchy ended sparked a series of events that led evangelicals to unite against common adversaries. This historical mobilization continued into modern times, enabling Brazilian evangelicals to oppose policies expanding women’s and LGBTQ+ rights effectively in recent decades. In contrast, in Chile and Peru, the Catholic Church did not oppose its separation from the state at the beginning of the twentieth century as fiercely as Brazil, resulting in less evangelical early mobilization. Consequently, evangelicals in Chile and Peru were less successful in resisting rights expansions and securing political representation.
Another critical aspect that Boas touches on is the media’s role in shaping evangelical political strategies. Evangelical churches in Brazil have adeptly utilized media to spread their message and mobilize their base. Televised sermons, radio programs, and now, social media platforms have been instrumental in galvanizing support and disseminating political messages. This media presence provides evangelicals with a significant advantage in reaching and influencing a broad audience, further solidifying their political power. Boas’ analysis is thorough and persuasive, employing novel data and methodologies, including content analysis of evangelical historical newspapers. This innovative approach enhances our understanding of evangelical elites’ political engagement and underscores Boas’ position as a leading scholar in the field. His book provides critical insights into why evangelicals have succeeded in forming political coalitions in some countries but not in others.
However, some aspects of Boas’ analysis warrant further scrutiny. He quickly dismisses the significance of varying evangelical population percentages in Chile (21%), Peru (13%), and Brazil (30%), arguing that these figures are similar. Yet, these differences could partially explain the varying levels of political representation. For instance, in Brazil, evangelical representatives frequently advocate for policies that ensure their church’s expansion, fostering a cycle of social and political growth.
Moreover, Boas’ theory does not fully account for the dramatic rise in evangelicals and their political representation in Brazil in the twenty-first century. Beyond threats exposed by the advancement of sexuality politics and inter-religion grievances, clientelism plays a critical role in evangelical political engagement in Brazil. The structure of evangelical churches, with their consistent presence and personal ties between pastors and congregations, contrasts sharply with the more formal and distant relationship of Catholic priests with their followers, restricted by Vatican directives.
Clientelism emerges as a critical mechanism for engagement in Latin American politics, and it finds particularly effective application in religious settings in Brazil. The weak political parties in Brazil, which are often transient in their influence, pale in comparison to the structure of evangelical churches. These churches provide a consistent presence that extends beyond electoral cycles, enabling continuous outreach to voters. Evangelical churches, compared to their Catholic counterparts, are uniquely positioned to leverage clientelistic relationships due to several factors. First, active electoral participation by Catholic priests is restricted by Vatican directives, limiting their direct involvement in politics. Furthermore, Catholic churches generally maintain a weaker presence in Brazil’s vulnerable communities, often characterized by a more formal and distant relationship between priests and their congregations. In contrast, evangelical pastors often foster close, personal ties with their followers, which enhances their ability to engage in and benefit from clientelistic exchanges. This dynamic not only deepens the political influence of evangelical churches but also underscores the broader adaptability of these religious communities to the socio-political fabric of Brazil.
Boas also highlights the importance of evangelical unity in Brazil, a factor that differentiates it from Chile and Peru. The ability of different Brazilian evangelical denominations to unite under common political goals has been pivotal and historically built as responses to the Catholic Church’s and state’s threats. Recently, this unity is again observed against new perceived external threats, such as policies promoting LGBTQ+ rights or other progressive social changes, which evangelicals view as contrary to their values.
In contrast, the fragmentation among evangelicals in Chile and Peru has hindered their political influence. In these countries, evangelical denominations have struggled to unite under a single political banner, leading to a dilution of their political power. This fragmentation is partly due to the historical context in which evangelicals in these countries have operated. In Chile, for example, the Catholic Church’s more passive approach to separation from the state did not provoke the same level of mobilization among evangelicals as seen in Brazil. Similarly, in Peru, the lack of a unifying external threat has resulted in a more fragmented evangelical community with intermediary political clout, compared to Brazil and Chile.
Boas’ focus on evangelical political success in Brazil raises questions about the long-term implications of this trend. The growing political influence of evangelicals has significant implications for Brazilian democracy. On the one hand, it represents a diversification of political representation, giving voice to a previously marginalized group. On the other hand, it raises concerns about the potential for religious influence to undermine secular democratic principles. The increasing political power of evangelicals, driven by their conservative social agenda, could lead to policies that restrict the rights of women, LGBTQ+ individuals, and other minority groups.
In conclusion, Evangelicals and Electoral Politics in Latin America is a compelling and insightful exploration of the political mobilization of evangelicals in Latin America. Taylor Boas’ meticulous research and innovative methodologies provide a nuanced understanding of why evangelicals have thrived politically in Brazil but not in other Latin American countries. For readers interested in the intersection of religion and politics, this book offers valuable perspectives and a deeper appreciation of the complexities involved.
Engaging with Boas’ work is essential for anyone seeking to understand the dynamic interplay between religion and politics in Latin America. His findings not only illuminate the past but also provide critical insights into the future of evangelical political engagement in the region. For those fascinated by the intricate connections between faith and political power, this book is a must-read, offering both a comprehensive analysis and a thought-provoking narrative. By examining the unique case of Brazil, Boas’ book encourages readers to consider the broader implications of religious political mobilization and its impact on democratic processes. As evangelical influence continues to grow, understanding its roots and trajectories becomes ever more crucial for scholars, policymakers, and engaged citizens alike.
