Historic Political ToolsThe Role of Violence, Coups and Revolutions

History doesn’t stay in the past◦Elite groups endure; hard to

displace; possible◦Applies to governing instruments too◦Tools used to take and use power

Interested in violence, coups and revolutions◦Think of bad, old movies set in LA

ViolenceCoercive forceEspecially associated with

authoritarian rule◦Unaccountable to public◦Unrestrained by law

Characterizes much of LA’s history

CoupCoup d'état = golpe de estadoMilitary force used to change

govtFive models

◦Historic◦Personal

Could turn into personal dictatorships

◦Institutional

◦Bureaucratic Authoritarian: Institutional and transformational

◦Emerging: Ecuador, 2000; Honduras, 2009 Military takes power but hands over to

civilians immediately

◦Reform coup Brazil-1889; Venezuela-1945, 1957, 1992;

Peru-1968

◦Counter-coup Coup against coupsters

What recent model suggests◦Civil elites pass buck to soldiers

Soldiers break impasse among civvies

◦Civil unrest still worries soldiers But mil-gov not practical now hand-back

Remember about military as elite◦Some places more than others

Last question: Why mil-gov not useful?◦When: post-Bureaucratic

Authoritarian◦Why: Extreme levels of violence +

poor economic management Even in Chile; disastrous in Argentina Arg mil stayed on sidelines in 2001-2

collapse

◦People are poisoned!Post-Cold War: Utility declines

RevolutionsBroadest: Armed overthrow of

government; so includes golpesNarrower: Armed overthrow of

govt that produces long term changes◦New elite or new forces join elite◦New policies◦New groups admitted to citizenship◦Examples: English Revo, 1689;

American Revo, 1775-83; LA independence

Narrowest: Social Revolution: Armed overthrow of govt that brings long-term changes to govt and produces major social changes◦Hierarchy of power and prestige ◦Examples: France, 1789; Mexico,

1910; Russia, 1917; China, 1949, Cuba, 1959

Preferred usage in PoliSci and SocSci

Peaceful revolutions? Possible◦Successful: Post- Communist

Eastern/Central Europe◦Failed: Guatemala, 1944-54; Chile,

1970-73◦Early days yet: Venezuela, 1998

Look at Mexico, Bolivia, Cuba, Nicaragua

Mexico, 1910What happened

◦Porfirio Díaz, Francisco Madero, Pancho Villa, Emiliano Zapata, etc.

◦Nationalist & reformist Constitution of 1917

◦Ten violent years + 10 more before stability

◦1929: PNRPRMPRI

Outcomes◦More national control of economy◦Rise of a Mexican middle class

Sometimes called last bourgeois revolution

◦Significant economic development, 1930s-70s

◦Has stuck, though much changedMany in PoliSci say it isn’t a

social revo◦Peasants and workers still excluded◦Cf. France, 1789

Bolivia, 1952-1964What happened

◦MNR, COB, Victor Paz Estenssoro, los indigenas – the Indian majority

◦Nationalize mines; end semi-feudal servitude for indigenous; land reform

◦Nationalist revolution◦But armed peasants and workers

Soon encountered economic dificulties

Divisions within the MNRA move to the right under

pressure from WashingtonBy 1964 falls to a golpe militarHad aspects of a social revolutionCouldn’t consolidate political side

Cuba, 1959-Last Spanish colony

◦Then US neo-colony◦Little democracy; much dictatorship

Important: Guerrilla insurgency◦Guerrilla – military strategy◦Guerrilla – political strategy

First guerrilla insurgency to take power in LA

Lots of imitators over next 30 years

Cuba special: very brief insurgency: 3 yrs◦Nicaragua: 18 yrs; China: 22 yrs

Cuba special 2: New Socialist Man◦Pursued from ‘59 to Fidel’s illness,

2006◦Culture/values > economics:

Marxist?Now changing under Raúl:

Chinese or Vietnamese model: communist capitalism

Nicaragua, 1979-1990Frente Sandinista de Liberación

Nacional, FSLN◦Guerrilla: 1961-79◦Fought Somozas◦Split in ‘77 among three

“tendencies”◦Reunitedform 9-man National

Directorate◦Won with multi-class alliance; many

radical Christians

Governing Junta, 1979-84Elections, mainly clean, 1984:

FSLN wins◦Daniel Ortega president; power shifts

from 9 to him◦Counterinsurgent war, 1981-90

Elections, ‘90, FSLN loses big; goes into opposition

Sandinistas important for two reasons

Multi-class alliance brings victory; not just peasants and workers

Accept electoral loss; not a vanguard party with a dictatorship of the proletariat

Revolutions in retrospectMexico’s stuck best, then Cuba’s;

Nica and Bolivia bring up the rearAll sought to remake societyMexico had most luck, then CubaHad to be political revolutions,

too

Violence in retrospectAny government can use

violenceAuthoritarian, non-democratic,

govts most prone to do so. Why?◦Unaccountable and opaque◦Won’t leave power if they don’t want

toProblem in LA (elsewhere, too)

◦Long non-democratic history makes force still look like the best answer.