DYNAMICS OF POLITICAL TRANSFORMATION TYPES OF POLITICAL REGIME

DYNAMICS OF POLITICAL TRANSFORMATION

TYPES OF POLITICAL REGIME • Democracy – Oligarchic – Co-optative – Liberal (elections with citizen rights) – Illiberal (elections w/o citizen rights) • Authoritarianism – Traditional (“man on horseback”) – One-party rule – Bureaucratic (B-A regimes) – Revolutionary

CHANGE OVER TIME • Oligarchic Rule and Top-down Reform (1880 s-1920 s) – Military strongmen – “Oligarchic democracy” – Co-optative democracy • Populism and Dictatorship (1930 s-1970 s) – Co-optative democracy – Populist alliances/corporatist states – Women and politics – A democratic surge [1940 s-70 s] – Bureaucratic-authoritarian regimes

CHANGE OVER TIME [cont. ] • The Revolutionary Path (1950 s-1980 s) – “plantation societies” – Cuba, Nicaragua—and others? • A Renewal of Democracies (1980 s-present) – – “unsolvable problems” pressure from below ending of Cold War absence of ideology • Rise of the “new left”? (1998 -present) – Politics of protest/use of ballot box – Chávez v. Lula – prospects?

SOCIAL STRUCTURE • Upper Class: – Urban (industrialists, bankers) – Rural (landowners) • Middle Class: – Urban (merchants, lawyers, etc. ) – Rural (small farmers) • Popular/Lower Class: – Urban (workers) – Rural (peasants, campesinos) • National Institutions: – State (including military) – Church • External Sector: – Economic (investors, merchants) – Political (foreign governments)

KEY QUESTIONS • What social groups are present? Or missing? • What kinds of coalitions are in play? On what basis? • What are the lines of social conflict? Vertical or horizontal? Social class or race/ethnicity? • Who has political power? How inclusive is the system? Who is denied access?

COMPARING CASES • Mexico: Revolution of 1910 + dominant-party system • Central America and Caribbean: plantation society, U. S. influence, dictatorship and protest • Cuba: plantation society, socialist revolution, resistance to United States • Question A: Compare Mexican and Cuban revolutions • Question B: Trace colonial legacies in Mexico and Cuba • Question C (for later reference): Why not more revolutionary ferment in CA + Caribbean? Given strong resemblance to Cuba?

COMPARING REVOLUTIONS • Mexico (pre-1910) – Alliance: landowners + foreigners + state = “integrating dictatorship” of Porfirio Díaz (1876 -1910) – Peasants > working class – Weak middle class • Mexico (post-1930 s) – Alliance: workers + peasants + state = populist authoritarian regime – Demise of landowning class – Inclusion of industrialists + foreign + state = prodevelopmental policies – Electoral democracy (2000 -present)

COMPARING REVOLUTIONS • Cuba (pre-1959) – Plantation society = Alliance: state + foreign + landowners = personalistic dictatorship tied to U. S. interests – Need for seasonal rural labor – Workers and peasants linked but excluded from politics, thus revolutionary “mentality” – Military corrupt, weak • Cuba (post-1959) – Revolutionary state in command of workers, peasants, urban and rural middle classes – Strong military and autonomous state apparatus – Dependence on foreign protector (USSR)