LATIN AMERICA’S “LEFT
TURN”
Gustavo A. Flores-Macías
Dept. of Government, Cornell University
Nine Latin American Countries Have Elected a
Leftist President Since 1998









Venezuela (Hugo Chavez 1998, 2000, 2006)
Chile (Ricardo Lagos 2000, Michelet Bachelet 2006)
Brazil (Lula, 2002 and 2006)
Argentina (Néstor Kirchner 2003, Cristina Fernández de
Kirchner 2007)
Uruguay (Tabaré Vásquez 2004, José Mújica 2009)
Bolivia (Evo Morales 2005, 2009)
Nicaragua (Daniel Ortega 2006)
Ecuador (Rafael Correa 2006, 2009)
Paraguay (Fernando Lugo 2008)
Notable Features of the Left Turn

Unprecedented in its scope and duration
-- Historically, leftist victories have been rare and usually short in
duration in Latin America
-- Nine countries account for 2/3 of Latin America’s population
-- Near misses in Mexico 2006 (leftist candidate Lopez Obrador
lost by less than one percent of the vote) and Peru (Ollanta
Humala won the first round of the presidential election but lost
in the second round Alan Garcia)
-- Only one of the new leftist governments has been turned out of
office (Chile); seven have achieved re-election
Notable Features of the Left Turn

Unexpected shift in the political landscape
-- Left thought to be politically vanquished in Latin America after
the end of the Cold War, collapse of communism in the Soviet
bloc
-- Leftist victories followed a decade of free market or
“neoliberal” economic reform in the aftermath of the 1980s
debt crisis– the so-called “Washington Consensus” for free
trade, privatization, liberalization of capital and labor
markets, etc.
Market Reform in Latin America
How Has the Left Come to Power?



Not always a surge in electoral support for the Left;
victory may result from a division of conservative
forces (i.e., Nicaragua in 2006)
But in other cases leftist parties or movements have
increased their electoral support
Argentina– leftist presidents (Kirchners) but not a leftist party
Why Growing Electoral Support?
No clear shift in ideological identities to the left in public
opinion surveys
-- But growing anti-U.S. sentiments
-- New political opportunities with the end of the Cold War; no
longer an automatic U.S. veto
 Short-term financial crises of the late 1990s– produced antiincumbent vote shifts that favored the Left
 Revival of social mobilization and protest (led to the collapse
of more conservative governments in Argentina, Ecuador, and
Bolivia)

Discontent with Neoliberal Model?



Market reforms succeeded at controlling
inflation
But slow and erratic growth (outside the
Chilean “showcase”)
Continuing vulnerability to financial crises
The Achilles Heel of the Neoliberal Model:
Ongoing “Social Deficits”
-- Continuing high levels of poverty (44% of the
population)
-- Widespread underemployment (>50% of the
regional workforce is in the informal sector, and
60% of new job creation)
-- Highest levels of inequality in the world
Global economic inequality



Inherent tensions between political democracy
(founded on the principle of equal citizenship rights)
and social reality of extreme inequality,
marginalization
Public opinion surveys suggest that Latin Americans
support both democracy and market economies, but
they are dissatisfied with the performance of both
Turn to the Left reflects efforts to restore social
citizenship, state protection against market insecurities
But no simple cause– because “left turn” not a
single phenomenon


Media often talks of distinctions between moderate
“social democratic” left (i.e., Chile, Uruguay, Brazil)
and more “radical” or “populist” left (Venezuela,
Bolivia, Ecuador, Nicaragua)
Overly simplistic categories– but there are significant
differences within the “left turn”
Political Differences

Very different levels of institutionalization
-- Established parties (Chile, Uruguay, Brazil) in institutionalized
party systems vs. new political movements or independent
personalities where party systems are in crisis (Venezuela,
Bolivia, Ecuador, Paraguay)
-- Govern within inherited constitution (Chile, Uruguay, Brazil) vs.
rewrite the constitution and the rules of the game (Venezuela,
Bolivia, Ecuador)
The Left and Democracy
None of the leftist governments has clearly broken with
democratic procedures– but very different implications for
democracy
-- victory of the left reflecting the consolidation of democracy,
institutionalized pluralism (Chile, Uruguay, Brazil)– constrains
what the left can do
-- victory of the left reflecting a crisis of democracy and party
systems (Venezuela, Bolivia, Ecuador– tension between
democracy as popular sovereignty and democracy as
institutionalized pluralism)

Hugo Chavez and Evo Morales
Outliers to the Left Turn
Mexico, Colombia, most of Central America,
Peru (?)
-- very strong economic ties to the U.S.
-- recent periods of civil war/leftist insurgency and/or
violence related to drug trafficking, with
military/police dependence on U.S. aid

The Mexican Case


Post-revolutionary hegemony of the Partido
Revolucionario Institucional (PRI), 1929-2000
Strengthening of both conservative (PAN) and leftist
(PRD) competitors starting in 1988 as economic crises
and market liberalization eroded the PRI’s dominance
The Mexican Case


Presidential victories by the PAN in 2000 and 2006
Narrow victory of the PAN’s Felipe Calderon over the
PRD’s Andrés Manuel López Obrador in 2006
(35.9% vs. 35.3%)

PAN’s disappointing midterm elections in 2009

Opportunity for the left in 2012?
 Diálogo
por la Reconstrucción: PRD, PT, Convergencia
The Mexican Case


Outbreaks of popular protest– Zapatista rebellion
1994, Oaxaca protests of 2006
Frequent allegations of electoral fraud
Looking Forward




Earned a reputation of economic responsibility
Alienated historical base along the way
High commodity prices vs. economic downturn
Habituation to democracy