Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-qxdb6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-27T12:14:51.796Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The ‘Brazilianization’ of Mexico?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 March 2014

Paul Cammack
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

IN THE EARY 1970s, AT THE HEIGHT OF BRAZIL'S ‘ECONOMIC miracle’, the possibility was mooted by some within the regime of an evolution towards a stable authoritarian system based upon a permanent ruling party capable of governing by consent. The most immediate model in the Latin American context was the ruling Mexican Partido Revolucionario Institucional (Institutionalized Revolutionary Party); hence the term ‘Mexicanization’ to express this concept. However, objective assessments of the prospects were somewhat sceptical. In 1974 President Geisel launched a process of ‘liberalization’, hoping to gain enough popular support through the ruling party, ARENA, to allow a measured relaxation of the repressive controls established after 1964. The process of change thus inaugurated led in little over a decade to the collapse of the regime, and the installation of a civilian, José Sarney, as president in March 1985. As I shall argue below, every move the regime made in its attempt to build a majority party backfired, and, ironically, it was the opposition MDB, whose development was blocked and harassed at every turn, which came nearest to emulating the PRI as a genuinely popular party with cross-class support, a broad national base, and a fund of legitimacy, deriving from its opposition role.

Type
Articles
Information
Government and Opposition , Volume 23 , Issue 3 , 01 July 1988 , pp. 304 - 320
Copyright
Copyright © Government and Opposition Ltd 1988

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 Linz, J., ‘The Future of an Authoritarian Situation or the Institutionalization of an Authoritarian Regime: The Case of Brazil’, in Stepan, A. (ed.), Authoritarian Brazil, New Haven and London, Yale University Press, 1973, pp. 247–9.Google Scholar

2 Martins, See L, ‘The “Liberalization” of Authoritarian Rule in Brazil’, in G. O’Don nell, P. Schmitter and L. Whitehead (eds), Transitions from Authoritarian Rule: Prospects for Democracy, Baltimore and London, Johns Hopkins University Press, 1986, 4 vols, Vol. 2, ch. 4, esp. p. 80.Google Scholar

3 have discussed the measures taken in this period further in Cammack, P., ‘Military Rule and Clientelism in Brazil’, in Clapham, C. (ed.), Private Patronage and Public Power: Political Clientelism in the Modern State, London, Frances Pinter, 1982.Google Scholar

4 Lamounier, B., ‘Authoritarian Brazil Revisitado: O Impacto das Eleiçöes na Abertura Política Brasileira 1974 1982’, Textos IDESP, No. 11, 1985, p. 35.Google Scholar

5 Fleischer, D., ‘The Brazilian Congress: From Abertura to New Republic’, in Selchei, W. (ed.), Political Liberalization in Brazil, Boulder, Colorado and London, 1986, Table 3.4, p. 123.Google Scholar

6 Alves, M.H.M., State and Opposition in Military Brazil, Austin, University of Texas Press, 1985, pp. 252–63.Google Scholar

7 Bailey, See J., ‘Can the PRI Be Reformed? Decentralizing Candidate Selection’, in Gentleman, J. (ed.), Mexican Politics in Transition, Boulder., Colorado and London, Westview Press, 1987, pp. 71–4.Google Scholar

8 For these and further details, Middlebrook, see K., ‘Political Liberalization in an Authoritarian Regime: The Case of Mexico’, in O’Donnell, Schmitter, and Whitehead (eds.), Transitionsfiom Authoritarian Rule, Vol. 2, ch. 6, pp. 135–6;Google Scholar Klesner, J., ‘Changing Patterns of Electoral Participation and Official Party Support in Mexico’, in Gentleman, (ed.), Mexican Politics in Transition, op. cit., pp. 98–100;Google Scholar and Barquín, M., ‘La Reforma Electoral de 1986–1987 en México: Retrospectiva y Análisis’, Cuadernos de CAPEL, 22, Costa Rica, 1987, pp. 23–30Google Scholar.

9 Klesner, J., ‘Changing Patterns of Electoral Participation and Official Party Support in Mexico’, in Gentleman, (ed.), Mexican Politics in Transition, pp. 113, 141–2Google Scholar. Pereira, Compare R. et al., Elelcdes no Brasil Pós 64, Sao Paulo, Global Editora, 1984, pp. 51–67Google Scholar.

10 Cornelius, W., The Political Economy of Mexico Under De La Madrid: The Crisis Deepens, 1983–1986, Research Reports Series, 43, Center for U.S.–Mexico Studies, University of California, San Diego, 1986, p. 3.Google Scholar

11 J. Bailey, ‘Can the PRI Be Reformed?, op cit., pp. 64–5.

12 Cornelius, W, ‘Political Liberalization in an Authoritarian Regime: Mexico, 1976–1985’, in Gentleman (ed.), Mexican Politics in Transition, op. cit, p. 28 Google Scholar.

13 See in particular Hamilton, N., The Limits of State Autonomy: Post–Revolutionary Mexico, Princeton, Princeton University Press, 1982 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Tardanico, R., ‘Revolutionary Nationalism and State–Building in Mexico’, Politics & Society, 10, 1, 1980 CrossRefGoogle Scholar, and ‘State, Dependency, and Nationalism: Revolutionary Mexico, 1924–1928’, Comparative Studies in Society and History, 24, 1982; and Kaufman, R., ‘Mexico and Latin American Authoritarianism’, in Reyna, J. and Weinert, R., (eds.), Authoritarianism in Mexico, Philadelphia, ISHI, 1977.Google Scholar

14 Brandenburg, F., The Making of Modem Mexico, Englewood Cliffs, Prentice Hall, 1964 Google Scholar, and Smith, P., Labyrinths of Power: Political Recruitment in Twentieth Century Mexico, Princeton, Princeton University Press, 1979.Google Scholar

15 Anderson, B. and Cockcroft, J., ‘Control and Cooptation in Mexican Politics’, in Horowitz, I. et al., Latin American Radicalism, New York, Random House, 1969.Google Scholar

16 Stevens, E., Protest and Response in Mexico, Cambridge, Mass., MIT Press, 1974, esp. pp. 277–81.Google Scholar

17 Kaufman Purcell, S. and Purcell, J., ’State and Society in Mexico: Must; i Stable Polity be Institutionalized?’, World Politics, 32, 2, 1980, p. 216.Google Scholar

18 Cornelius, W., Politics and the Migrant Poor in Mexico City, Stanford, Stanford University Press, 1975 Table 3.1, p. 56.Google Scholar

19 Purcell, S., ‘Decision Making in an Authoritarian Regime: Theoretical Implications from a Mexican Case Study’, World Politics, 25, 3, 1973.Google Scholar

20 J Bailey, ’Can the PRI Be Reformed?’, op. cit., p. 83.

21 See Smith, Labyrinths of Power, op. cit., pp. 133—58.

22 Story, D., The Mexican Ruling Party: Stability and Authority, New York, Praeger, 1986, pp. 121–32.Google Scholar

23 Reyna, J., ‘Redefining the Authoritarian Regime’, in Reyna, J. and Weinert, R. (eds.), Authoritarianism in Mexico, op. cit., pp. 160, 168.Google Scholar