Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T00:09:10.824Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Organization and Labor-Based Party Adaptation: The Transformation of Argentine Peronism in Comparative Perspective

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 June 2011

Steven Levitsky
Steven Levitsky
Affiliation:
Harvard University
Get access

Abstract

This article examines the capacity of Latin American labor-based parties to adapt to the challenges of economic liberalization and working class decline. It presents an organizational approach to explaining party change, highlighting the ways in which informal and weakly institutionalized structures may contribute to party adaptation. It argues that loosely structured labor-based parties, such as many mass populist parties, possess a distinctive advantage in adapting to environmental change. Though a source of inefficiency and even internal chaos, populist legacies such as fluid internal structures, nonbureaucratic hierarchies, and centralized leaderships yield a high degree of strategic flexibility. The argument is applied to the case of the Argentine Justicialista Party (PJ), a mass populist party that adapted with striking success to the socioeconomic changes of the 1980s and 1990s. The weakly institutionalized nature of Peronism's party-union linkage facilitated the dismantling of traditional mechanisms of labor participation, which resulted in the Pj's rapid transformation from a labor-based party into a predominantly patronage-based party. At the same time, the Pj's nonbureaucratic hierarchy and weakly institutionalized leadership bodies provided President Carlos Menem with substantial room for maneuver in developing and carrying out a radical neoliberal strategy that, while at odds with Peronism's traditional program, was critical to its survival as a major political force. The conclusion places the Peronist case in comparative perspective by examining the cases of five other Latin American labor-based parties.

Type
Research Article
Information
World Politics , Volume 54 , Issue 1 , October 2001 , pp. 27 - 56
Copyright
Copyright © Trustees of Princeton University 2001

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 Labor-based parties are parties whose core constituency is organized labor. Such parties depend on union support (in the form of organizational resources, votes, and social peace) for their success, and in exchange they often grant unions influence over the party program and the candidate-selection process.

2 Koelble, Thomas, “Recasting Social Democracy in Europe: A Nested Games Explanation of Strategic Adjustment in Political Parties,” Politics and Society 20, no. 1 (1992CrossRefGoogle Scholar); Kitschelt, Herbert, The Transformation of European Social Democracy (New York:Cambridge University Press, 1994), 225CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

3 “Primary goal” is taken from Harmel, Robert and Janda, Kenneth, “An Integrated Theory of Party Goals and Party Change,” Journal of Theoretical Politics 6, no. 3 (1994), 265CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

4 Downs, Anthony, An Economic Theory of Democracy (New York:Harper and Row, 1957Google Scholar); Schlesinger, Joseph A., “On the Theory of Party Organization,” Journal of Politics 46, no. 2 (1984), 383CrossRefGoogle Scholar–84.

5 Panebianco, Angelo, Political Parties: Organization and Power (Cambridge:Cambridge University Press, 1988), 243Google Scholar.

6 Stokes, Susan, Mandates, Markets and Democracy: Neoliberalism by Surprise in Latin America (New York:Cambridge University Press, 2001CrossRefGoogle Scholar).

7 Thus, Adam Przeworski and John Sprague's conclusion that the erosion of industrial working classes would lead to the decline of electoral socialism proved overly pessimistic; see Przeworski, and Sprague, , Paper Stones: A History of Electoral Socialism (Chicago:University of Chicago Press, 1986), 183Google Scholar–85.

8 Rose, Richard and Mackie, Thomas T., “Do Parties Persist or Fail? The Big Trade-off Facing Organizations,” in Lawson, Kay and Merkl, Peter H., eds., When Parties Fail: Emerging Alternative Organizations (Princeton:Princeton University Press, 1988), 557Google Scholar; Wilson, Frank, “The Sources of Party Change: The Social Democratic Parties of Britain, France, Germany, and Spain,” in Lawson, Kay, ed., How Political Parties Work: Perspectives from Within (Westport, Conn.:Praeger, 1994Google Scholar).

9 Panebianco (fn. 5), 242–44; Harmel and Janda (fn. 3), 266–67.

10 Scholarship in this tradition includes Panebianco (fn. 5); Koelble, Thomas, The Left Unraveled: Social Democracy and the New Left Challenge (Durham, N.C.:Duke University Press, 1991Google Scholar); Koelble (fn. 2); and Kitschelt (fn. 2).

11 Strom, Kaare, “A Behavioral Theory of Competitive Political Parties,” American Journal of Political Science 34, no. 2 (1990), 577CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Kitschelt (fn. 2), 212–13.

12 Kitschelt (fn. 2), 212; Roberts, Kenneth M., Deepening Democracy? The Modern Left and Social Movements in Chile and Peru (Stanford, Calif.:Stanford University Press, 1998), 47Google Scholar.

13 Sartori, Giovanni, “European Political Parties: The Case of Polarized Pluralism,” in Dahl, Robert and Neubauer, D. E., eds., Readings in Modern Political Analysis (New York:Prentice-Hall, 1968Google Scholar); Wellhofer, E. Spencer, “Strategies for Party Organization and Voter Mobilization: Britain, Norway, and Argentina,” Comparative Political Studies 12, no. 2 (1979CrossRefGoogle Scholar).

14 Panebianco (fn.5),267.

15 For a similar argument, see Mainwaring, Scott, Rethinking Party Systems in the Third Wave of Democratization: The Case of Brazil (Stanford, Calif.:Stanford University Press, 1999), 21–25Google Scholar.

16 Strom (fn. 11), 577–79.

17 Kitschelt, Herbert, “Austrian and Swedish Social Democrats in Crisis: Party Strategy and Organization in Corporatist Regimes,” Comparative Political Studies 24, no. 1 (1994), 17–21Google Scholar.

18 Deschouwer, Kris, “The Decline of Consociationalism and the Reluctant Modernization of Belgian Mass Parties,” in Katz, Richard S. and Mair, Peter, eds., How Parties Organize: Change and Adaptation in Party Organizations in Western Democracies (London:Sage Publications, 1994), 83Google Scholar; Kitschelt (fn. 2), 216.

19 Panebianco (fn. 5), 262–67.

20 Kitschelt (fn. 2), 216.

21 Panebianco (fn. 5), 272–74.

22 Huntington, Samuel P., Political Order in Changing Societies (New Haven:Yale University Press, 1968), 13–17Google Scholar; Kesselman, Mark, “Overinstitutionalization and Political Constraint: The Case of France,” Comparative Politics 3, no. 1 (1970CrossRefGoogle Scholar); Panebianco (fn. 5), 261.

23 Levitsky, Steven, “Peronism and Institutionalization: The Case, the Concept, and the Case for Unpacking the Concept,” Party Politics 4, no. 1 (1998CrossRefGoogle Scholar).

24 Janda, Kenneth, Political Parties: A Cross-National Survey (New York:Free Press, 1980), 19–27Google Scholar.

25 Huntington (fn. 22), 15; McGuire, James W., Peronism without Perón: Unions, Parties, and Democracy in Argentina (Stanford, Calif:Stanford University Press, 1997), 7–10Google Scholar.

26 March, James G. and Olsen, Johan P., Rediscovering Institutions: The Organizational Basis of Politics (New York:Free Press, 1989Google Scholar).

27 Janda (fn. 24), 19; Panebianco (fn. 5), 58–60; Mainwaring (fn. 15), 26–27.

28 Jones, Mark, “Evaluating Argentina's Presidential Democracy, 1983–1995,” in Mainwaring, Scott and Shugart, Mathew Soberg, eds., Presidentialism and Democracy in Latin America (New York:Cambridge University Press, 1997), 272Google Scholar.

29 McGuire (fn. 25), 1.

30 Huntington (fn. 22), 15–17.

31 Zucker, Lvnne G., “The Role of Institutionalization in Cultural Persistence,” American Sociological Review 42 (October 1977), 729CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

32 Ibid., 728.

33 Nelson, Richard R. and Winter, Sidney G., An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change (Cambridge:Harvard University Press, 1982), 74–110Google Scholar; March and Olson (fn. 26), 24.

34 Nelson and Winter (fn. 33), 74–83; Zucker, Lynne, “Organizations and Institutions,” in Bacharach, Samuel, ed., Research in the Sociology of Organizations, vol. 2 (Greenwich, Conn.:JAI Press, 1983), 5Google Scholar

35 North, Douglass C., “A Transaction Cost Theory of Politics”, Journal of Theoretical Politics 2, no. 4 (1990), 364CrossRefGoogle Scholar–65.

36 Kitschelt (fn. 17), 17–21; also Michels, Roberto, Political Parties (1911; New York:Free Press, 1962), 174Google Scholar–76.

37 Kitschelt (fn. 17), 10.

38 Downs, Anthony, Inside Bureaucracy (Boston:Little, Brown, 1967), 96–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

39 Schonfeld, William R., “Oligarchy and Leadership Stability: The French Communist, Socialist, and Gaullist Parties,” American Journal of Political Science 25, no. 2 (1981), 231CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

40 Michels (fn. 36).

41 Panebianco (fn. 5), 58.

42 Harmel, Robert and Svasand, Lars, “Party Leadership and Party Institutionalization: Three Phases of Development,” West European Politics 16, no. 3 (1993), 68CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

43 A mass populist party is a mass-based party born of a populist movement, which Collier and Collier define as a movement “characterized by mass support from the urban working class and/or peasantry; a strong element of mobilization from above; a central role of leadership from the middle sector or elite, typically of a personalistic and/or charismatic nature; and an anti-status quo, nationalist ideology and program”; see Collier, David and Collier, Ruth Berins, Shaping the Political Arena (Princeton:Princeton University Press, 1991), 788Google Scholar.

44 Panebianco (fn. 5), 262–67.

45 Palomino, Hector, Cambios ocupacionales y sociales en Argentina, 1947–1985 (Occupational and social changes in Argentina, 1947–1985) (Buenos Aires:CISEA, 1987Google Scholar).

46 Catterberg, Edgardo, Argentina Confronts Politics: Political Culture and Public Opinion in the Argentine Transition to Democracy (Boulder, Colo.:Lynne Rienner, 1991), 81–82Google Scholar.

47 Palermo, Vicente and Novaro, Marcos, Politica y poder en elgobierno de Menem (Politics and power in the Menem government) (Buenos Aires:Norma Ensayo, 1996), 143Google Scholar.

48 Levitsky, Steven, “From Laborism to Liberalism: Institutionalization and Labor-Based Party Adaptation in Argentina, 1983–95” (Ph.D. diss., University of California, Berkeley, 1999), 216Google Scholar–17.

49 Corrales, Javier, “From Market Correctors to Market Creators: Executive-Ruling Party Relations in the Economic Reforms of Argentina and Venezuela” (Ph.D diss., Harvard University, 1996Google Scholar).

50 Ibid., 213–17.

51 Jones (fn. 28), 274.

52 See Bartolini, Stefano and Mair, Peter, Identity, Competition, and Electoral Availability (Cambridge:Cambridge University Press, 1990), 234Google Scholar. Although PJ membership entails a lower level of commitment than in most European mass parties, this figure is nevertheless strikingly high.

53 Levitsky, Steven, “An Organized Disorganization: Informal Organization and the Persistence of Local Party Structures in Argentine Peronism,” Journal of Latin American Studies 33, no. 1 (2001), 40–43Google Scholar.

54 Ostiguy, Pierre, “Peronism and Anti Peronism: Class-Cultural Cleavages and Political Identity in Argentina (Ph.D diss., University of California, Berkeley, 1998Google Scholar).

55 McGuire(fn.25).

56 Author interview with congressional deputy José Lopez, Buenos Aires, September 15, 1997.

57 Author interview with party activist, Buenos Aires, September 9,1997.

58 Downs (fn. 38), 96–100.

59 Author interview with local party leader, Quilmel, province of Buenos Aires, May 8,1997.

60 Author interview with Mayor Juan José Alvarez of Hurlingham, Hurlingham, province of Buenos Aires, July 18,1997.

61 On hub-and-spokes dynamics, see Knoke, David, Political Networks: The Structural Perspective (New York:Cambridge University Press, 1990), 11–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

62 McGuire(fn.25).

63 For a detailed history of the “62,” see McGuire (fn. 25).

64 Ibid., 99.

65 Author interview with former CGT general secretary Oscar Lescano, Buenos Aires, October 27, 1997.

66 Clarín, July 11, 1986,12; October 6, 1986, 10.

67 Clarín, September 28, 1991, 14.

68 Author interview with pharmacy employees union leader José Azcurra, Buenos Aires, October 20,1997.

69 Author interview with hospital workers union leader Carlos West Ocampo, Buenos Aires, October 13, 1997.

70 Catterberg, Edgardo and Braun, Maria, “Las elecciones presidenciales Argentinas del 14 de mayo de 1989: la ruta a la normalidad,” Desarrollo Económico 115 (October-December 1989), 372Google Scholar.

71 Auyero, Javier, Poor People's Politics: Peronist Networks and the Legacy of Evita (Durham, N.C.:Duke University Press, 2000CrossRefGoogle Scholar); Levitsky (fn. 53), 51–57.

72 Palermo, Vicente, “El Menemismo, Perdura?” in Iturrieta, Aníbal, ed., El pemamiento politico argentino contemporáneo (Contemporary Argentine political thought) (Buenos Aires:Editor Latinoamericano, 1994), 322Google Scholar. On the Menem reforms, see Gerchunoff, Pablo and Torre, Juan Carlos, “La politica de liberalizatión económica en la administración de Menem,” Desarrollo Económico 143 (1996Google Scholar); and Palermo and Novaro (fn. 47).

73 Gwartney, James et al., Economic Freedom of the World, 1975–1995 (Vancouver:Fraser Institute, 1996), 79Google Scholar.

74 Gerchunoff and Torre (fn. 72), 736.

75 Author interview with José Luis Manzaao, Buenos Aires, December 5,1997.

76 Levitsky (fn. 48), 219–26.

77 Clarín, July 14,1988, 2, 15; July 29,1988, 7.

78 Clarín, July 11, 1988,2–3; July 14,1988,14–15.

79 Clarín, July 16,1989, 23; July 17,1989, 7.

80 Author interview with Antonio Cafiero, Buenos Aires, October 3,1997.

81 Clarín, June 24,1990,13.

82 Author interview with Cafiero (fn. 80).

83 Author interview with Manzano (fn. 75).

84 Author interview with Roberto García, Buenos Aires, June 23,1997.

85 Author interview with Senator José Luis Gioja, Buenos Aires, September 18,1997.

86 Clarín, February 14,1991, 4.

87 La Vox del Interior, September 21,1991, 4a.

88 Clarin, December 3, 1995, 22.

89 Author interview with Gustavo Morato, Buenos Aires, June 13, 1997.

90 Clarín, March 1, 1990, 10; March 9,1990,2; June 3,1990, 6.

91 “Author interview with Carlos “Chacho” Alvarez, Buenos Aires, July 29,1997.

92 Página 12, March 23,1993,12; Clarín, May 9,1993,16, May 11,1993,11; May 13,1993, 6.

93 Author interview with former party leader Carlos Grosso, Buenos Aires, November 28,1997.

94 Carlos Gervasoni, “La sustentabilidad electoral de los programas de estabalización y reforma estructural: Los casos de Argentina y Perú (Paper presented at the twentieth international congress of the Latin American Studies Association, Guadalajara, Mexico, April 17–19,1997).

95 Ostiguy (fn. 54), 464–79.

96 Levitsky (fn. 48), 272–79.

97 Martz, John, “Party Elites and Leadership in Colombia and Venezuela,” Journal of Latin American Studies 24, no. 1 (1992), 120CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Corrales, Javier, “El presidente y su gente: Cooperación y conflicto entre los ámbitos técnicos y políticos en Venezuela, 1989–1993,” Nueva Sociedad 152 (November-December 1997), 98–99Google Scholar.

98 Coppedge, Michael, Strong Parties and Lame Duck: Presidential Partyarchy and Factionalism in Venezuela (Stanford, Calif.:Stanford University Press, 1994), 20–21Google Scholar, 66–67.

99 Martz, John, Acción Democrática: Evolution of a Modern Political Party in Venezuela (Princeton:Princeton University Press), 157Google Scholar–67; Coppedge, Michael, “La política interna de acción democrática durante la crisis economica,” Cuadernos de CENDES 7 (1988), 169Google Scholar–70.

100 Corrales (fn. 97), 98.

101 Ellner, Steve, “Organized Labor's Political Influence and Party Ties in Venezuela: Acción Democrática and Its Labor Leadership,” Journal of Interamerican Studies and World Affairs 13, no. 4 (1989), 98–104Google Scholar.

102 Corrales (fn. 49), 237, 251–58.

103 Collier, Ruth Berins, The Contradictory Alliance: State-Labor Relations and Regime Change in Mexico (Berkeley, Calif.:International and Area Studies, 1992Google Scholar); Katrina Burgess, “Reinventing Class Populist Parties: Party Crisis and Change in Mexico, Bolivia, Venezuela, and Peru” (Paper presented at the twenty-second International Congress of the Latin American Studies Association, Miami, Florida, March 16–18,2000).

104 Langston, Joy, “Why Rules Matter: The Formal Rules of Candidate Selection and Leadership Selection in the PRI, 1978–1996,” CIDE Documento de Trabajo no. 58 (Mexico City:Centre de Investigación y Docencia Económica), 7—9Google Scholar.

105 Collier (fn. 103).

106 Hernández Rodriguez, Rogelio, “La reforma interna y los conflictos en el PRI,” Foro International (October-December, 1991), 222Google Scholar–49; Burgess, Katrina, “Alliances under Stress: Economic Reform and Party-Union Relations in Mexico, Spain, and Venezuela” (Ph.D diss., Princeton University, 1998), 151Google Scholar–53.

107 Collier, Ruth Berins, “The Transformation of Labor-Based One-Partyism at the End of the Twentieth Century: The Case of Mexico,” in Giliomee, Hermann and Simkins, Charles, eds., The Awkward Embrace: One-Party Domination and Democracy (Capetown:Tafelberg, 1999), 234Google Scholar.

108 Roberts (fn. 12), 47.

109 Roberts, Kenneth, “Renovation in the Revolution? Dictatorship, Democracy, and Political Change in the Chilean Left,” Kellogg Institute Working Paper no. 203 (Notre Dame, Ind.:Kellogg Institute, 1994), 27Google Scholar.

110 Mary Alice McMarthy, “Center-Left Parties in Chile: Party-Labor Relations under a Minimalist State” (Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago, April 10–12,1997); Roberts (fn. 12), 134–35,159.

111 Roberts (fn. 12), 48.

112 Roberts (fn. 109), 22.

113 McMarthy (fn. 110).

114 Graham, Carol, “Peru's APRA Party in Power: Impossible Revolution, Relinquished Reform, Journal of Interamerican Studies and World Affairs 32, no. 3 (1990), 80–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

115 Sanborn, Cynthia, “El Apra en un contexto de cambio, 1968–88,” in Bonilla, Heraclio and Drake, Paul W., eds., El APRA de lai ideohgia a la praxis (Lima:Centro Latinoamericano de Historia Economica y Social, 1989), 110Google Scholar–13.

116 Ibid., 118.

117 Pastor, Manuel and Wise, Carol, “Peruvian Economic Policy in the 1980s: From Orthodoxy to Heterodoxy and Back,” Latin American Research Review 27, no. 2 (1992Google Scholar).

118 Corrales (fn. 49); Haggard, Stephen and Kaufman, Robert K., The PoliticalEconomy of Democratic Transitions (Princeton:Princeton University Press, 1995), 166Google Scholar–74.

119 Huntington (fn. 22); Mainwaring, Scott and Scully, Timothy R., “Introduction,” in Mainwaring, and Scully, , eds., Building Democratic Institutions (Stanford, Calif.:Stanford University Press, 1995Google Scholar); Mainwaring (fn. 15).