Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-30T16:33:00.232Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Prologue: - Reflections on Two Episodes of Popular Inclusion

Structuring and Restructuring Arenas of Participation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 January 2021

By
Ruth Berins Collier
Edited by
Diana Kapiszewski ,
Steven Levitsky  and
Deborah J. Yashar
Diana Kapiszewski
Affiliation:
Georgetown University, Washington DC
Steven Levitsky
Affiliation:
Harvard University, Massachusetts
Deborah J. Yashar
Affiliation:
Princeton University, New Jersey
Get access

Summary

These reflections adopt a macro-historical perspective on the “new inclusion,” comparing it to the more restricted, “initial” inclusion of the labor movement in the early twentieth century. The earlier inclusion, which introduced mass participation, founded and structured two arenas of popular sector participation: the interest and party-electoral arenas. The second inclusion not only encompassed previously omitted groups but also restructured those two participatory arenas. After situating both inclusionary episodes in a wider historical framework, I compare them in terms of four traits: 1) the form of popular organizations, 2) problems of collective action, 3) salient cleavages and issues, and 4) access to policymaking. The restructured arenas represent a move from the centrality of unions, corporatism, and productionist economic issues to a structure of participation that is more fragmented and pluralist, with multiple cleavages and a set of issues that now include a range of identity-based rights and consumption-based demands. While these changes are positive gains, an important question is the degree to which this restructuring has effectively demobilized the popular sectors on important macro and micro economic issues. These are important areas of policymaking, which remain salient in the politics of the elite and have consequential economic, distributional, and political consequences for the popular sectors.

Keywords

labor incorporationpopular inclusionpolitical representation/participation
Type
Chapter
Information
The Inclusionary Turn in Latin American Democracies , pp. xxv - xlviii
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2021

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

Chambers-Ju, Chris. 2017. “Protest or Politics? Varieties of Teacher Representation in Latin America.” PhD dissertation in Political Science, University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
Collier, Ruth Berins and Collier, David. 1979. “Inducements versus Constraints: Disaggregating ‘Corporatism.’” The American Political Science Review 73(4): 967–969.Google Scholar
Collier, Ruth Berins, and Collier, David. 1991. Shaping the Political Arena: Critical Junctures, the Labor Movement, and Regime Dynamics in Latin America. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Collier, Ruth Berins, and Chambers-Ju, Christopher. 2012. “Popular Representation in Contemporary Latin American Politics.” In Routledge Handbook of Latin American Politics, edited by Kingstone, Peter and Yashar, Deborah J., 564–578. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Collier, Ruth Berins, and Handlin, Samuel. 2009. Reorganizing Popular Politics: Participation and the New Interest Regime in Latin America. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press.Google Scholar
Cook, Maria Lorena. 1996. Organizing Dissent: Unions, the State, and the Democratic Teachers’ Movement in Mexico. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press.Google Scholar
De la Garza, Enrique. 2006. “El sindicalismo y el cambio en las relaciones laborales durante el gobierno de Vicente Fox.” In El sindicalismo en México: historia, crisis y perspectivas, edited by González, José and Gutiérrez, Antonio, 305–330. Mexico: CENPROS-Plaza y Valdés.Google Scholar
Etchemendy, Sebastián. 2019. “The Construction and Stabilization of Segmented Neo-Corporatism: Institutional Legacies, Left Power and Wage Coordination in Uruguay (2005–2017).” Paper presented at REPAL Annual Conference, Tulane University.Google Scholar
Etchemendy, Sebastián, and Collier, Ruth Berins. 2007. “Down But Not Out: Union Resurgence and Segmented Neo-Corporatism in Argentina (2003–2007).” Politics & Society 35(3). 363–401.Google Scholar
Fairfield, Tasha. 2015. Private Wealth and Public Revenue in Latin America: Business Power and Tax Politics. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Garay, Candelaria. 2009. “Associational Linkages to Labor Unions and Political Parties.” In Reorganizing Popular Politics: Participation and the New Interest Regime in Latin America, edited by Collier, Ruth Berins and Handlin, Samuel, 260–292. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press.Google Scholar
Kapiszewski, Diana. 2009. “Targeting State and Society: Strategic Repertoires of Associations.” In Reorganizing Popular Politics: Participation and the New Interest Regime in Latin America, edited by Collier, Ruth Berins and Samuel Handlin, , 187–229. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press.Google Scholar
Kurtz, Marcus J. 2004. Free Market Democracy and the Chilean and Mexican Countryside. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lupu, Noam. 2014. “Brand Dilution and the Breakdown of Political Parties in Latin America.” World Politics 66(4): 561–602.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mainwaring, Scott. 2018. “Party System Institutionalization, Predictability, and Democracy.” In Party Systems in Latin America: Insitutionalization, Decay, and Collapse, edited by Mainwaring, Scott, 71–101. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Mair, Peter. 2013. Ruling the Void: The Hollowing of Western Democracy. London: Verso.Google Scholar
Mayka, Lindsay. 2019. Building Participatory Institutions in Latin America: Reform Coalitions and Institutional Change. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
O’Donnell, Guillermo A. 1973. Modernization and Bureaucratic-Authoritarianism: Studies in South America Politics. Berkeley: Institute of International Studies, University of California.Google Scholar
Palmer-Rubin, Brian. 2019. “Evading the Patronage Trap: Organizational Capacity and Demand Making in Mexico.” Comparative Political Studies 52. 13–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Poertner, Mathias. 2018. “Creating Partisans: The Organizational Roots of New Parties in Latin America.” Dissertation, University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
Rich, Jessica A. J. 2019. State-Sponsored Activism: Bureaucrats and Social Movements in Democratic Brazil. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Roberts, Kenneth M. 2014. Changing Course in Latin America: Party Systems in the Neoliberal Era. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Schipani, Andrés 2019. “Strategies of Redistribution: The Left and the Popular Sectors in Latin America.” Dissertation, University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
Seawright, Jason. 2009. “Political Participation and Representational Distortion: The Nexus Between Associationalism and Partisan Politics.” In Reorganizing Popular Politics: Participation and the New Interest Regime in Latin America, edited by Collier, Ruth Berins and Handlin, Samuel, 132–185. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press.Google Scholar
Silva, Eduardo. 2017. “Conclusion: Reflections on the Second Wave of Popular Incorporation for a Post-Neoliberal Era.” In Reshaping the Political Arena in Latin America, edited by Silva, Eduardo and Rossi, Federico M., 321–336. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.Google Scholar
Snyder, Richard. 2001. Politics after Neoliberalism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Yashar, Deborah J. (2005). Contesting Citizenship in Latin America. The Rise of Indigenous Movements and the Postliberal Challenge. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×