11B
Populism in Latin America
T
he growth and appeal of populism in Latin
America resulted directly from the harsh social
and economic realities of the 1930s, rural-urban
migratory patterns, and the expansion of cities in the re-
gion. Populism marked a new way to conduct politics in
Latin America.
In general, populist leaders held four common charac-
teristics: they were extraordinarily charismatic individuals
with excellent oratory skills; they maintained authority via
a clear understanding of the patron–client networks that
governed society; they used historic norms of social hier-
archy to their advantage; and they acted as social inter-
locutors, preventing armed revolution while insisting on
social reforms from the traditional elites. Populism in Latin
America was a creative, organic solution to pressing and
mounting economic, social, and political troubles on the
continent: In four places—Argentina, Brazil, Mexico, and
Peru—populist leaders had immense influence in charting
national politics and transitioning societies through diffi-
cult times. In Colombia, populism was less successful for
the charismatic populist leader Jorge Eliécer Gaitán was
assassinated on April 9, 1948—a date that changed the
course of Colombian history.
Populism in Argentina is associated with two figures,
Juan Domingo Perón and his wife, Eva “Evita” Duarte
Perón. Perón’s first presidential period lasted from 1946
to 1955 amid the rapid growth of unions and an expand-
ing, increasingly radical working class. Perón presented
himself publicly as “protector” of workers and the
underclass, and he was clearly connected with the urban
working class in Buenos Aires, the capital city. Evita, an
elegant actress with working-class roots, spent a good deal
of time doling out charity to the underprivileged—the
descamisados, or (literally) the “shirtless ones.” She was
able to cement a strong alliance between the poor, the
urban working class, and the middle class, all of whom
identified with the movement known as Peronism. The
Peróns were intensely nationalistic, and they sought to
steer a “third way” in terms of economic policy, which
took the country on a course somewhere between social-
ism and unfettered, unregulated capitalism. Eva died in
1952 of ovarian cancer, and by 1955 the military moved
in to remove Juan Perón after his economic plan faltered
significantly.
Latin American populism was a form of social control
whereby a charismatic leader would control the state and
distribute patronage to the people yet avoid a major reor-
dering of society via the revolutionary process. Populists
rejected the idea of class conflict and preferred to refer to
the nation as a sort of national family—the populist leaders
were, of course, the father figure, or in the case of Eva Perón,
the nation’s mother. In fact, Brazil’s populist leader, Getúlio
Vargas, who ruled that country from 1930 to 1945 and again
134
from 1950 to 1954, was referred to as pai do povo, or “fa-
ther of the people.” Vargas exerted strict control over the
economic and political structure of Brazilian society. He was
a masterful politician, and even though his regime became
much more dictatorial from 1937 to 1945 (during what is
known as the “Estado Novo”), Vargas remained popular in
the eyes of the Brazilian people because of his unassuming
charm, his self-deprecating sense of humor, and his comfort
and ease in the presence of ordinary Brazilian citizens.
Mexico’s Lázaro Cárdenas ruled from 1934 to 1940.
Unlike Mexican politicians who governed before him,
Cárdenas listened more than he spoke, and he distributed
about 49 million acres of land for communal use, called
ejidos, to the Indian communities. Like Perón, Cárdenas
worked to strengthen organized labor movements, which
won him favor with the working class and strengthened
his authority in Mexico. When the working class became
militant and the petroleum workers organized a strike in
1936, Cárdenas nationalized all foreign-owned oil inter-
ests and created the state-run oil company, PEMEX. By
1938, the petroleum industry was nationalized—to the sum
of 24 million dollars paid to British and American oil pro-
ducers—thus demonstrating the degree to which populism
could create national cohesion.
In Peru, Víctor Raúl Haya de la Torre is associated with
that country’s populist movement. Haya founded the po-
litical party known as APRA (or the Populist Alliance for
the American Revolution) in the late 1920s. An electrify-
ing speaker, Haya de la Torre challenged the elites to dis-
tribute resources to the popular classes. He called for
nationalization of key sectors of the economy and criti-
cized the damaging effects of unchecked foreign invest-
ment in Peru. Though Haya de la Torre never arrived to
the office of the presidency in Peru, he significantly im-
pacted Peruvian politics for generations; the first APRA
candidate to win the presidency was Alan García, in the
mid-1980s.
Populists helped change Latin American politics and
society in the twentieth century; they challenged traditional
elites to distribute resources more justly, while defending
the popular classes against the more extreme effects of
unregulated capitalist expansion. Populists had to walk a
narrow path. They had to build on nationalist sentiments
by committing to reforms, while at the same time steering
clear from those in society who called for more dramatic
change via the revolutionary option.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Chasteen, John Charles. 2001. Born in Blood and Fire: A Concise His-
tory of Latin America. New York: W.W. Norton.
Skidmore, Thomas E. 1999. Brazil: Five Centuries of Change. New York:
Oxford University Press.
Stein, Steve. 1980. Populism in Peru: The Emergence of the Masses and
the Politics of Social Control. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
135