Competitive authoritarianism and democracy in the contemporary Andes

Date Presented:

February 6

Abstract:

During the 2000s, political regimes in Bolivia, Ecuador, and Venezuela moved from unstable democracies toward competitive authoritarianism under leftist, populist presidents such as Hugo Chávez. At the same time, neighboring Peru enjoyed one of the longest periods of democratic governance in its history after emerging from its own experience with competitive authoritarianism. What accounts for these diverging regime trajectories in four countries that share many economic, political, and social conditions? Focusing on the Peruvian case and building off work that connects populism to the development of competitive authoritarian regimes, I argue that a factor behind this variation is the “emerging, urban middle class”—residents of recently settled areas on the peripheries of major cities who largely work in the informal sector but have acquired lifestyles associated with the traditional middle class. Whereas elsewhere this group has been a key constituency behind presidents like Chávez in their efforts to establish new institutions, in Peru it has shown a preference for moderate institutional reform over revolution. I argue this conservatism results from Peru’s experience with neoliberal economics over the last twenty years. While far from a universally positive experience, neoliberalism has provided economic benefits to this group and thereby limited, at least in the short run, this group’s interest in institutional change, economic or political, compared to their counterparts elsewhere in the region.