Breaking with recent research on the left in Latin America that has moved away from leadership-based explanations, George Philip and Francisco Panizza bring back a personality-centered approach to explain different aspects of the leftist governments of Hugo Chávez in Venezuela, Rafael Correa in Ecuador, and Evo Morales in Bolivia. Contrary to recent work by other scholars (e.g., Kurt Weyland, Raúl Madrid, and Wendy Hunter, eds., Leftist Governments in Latin America, 2010; Steven Levitsky and Kenneth Roberts, eds., The Resurgence of the Latin American Left, 2011; and Gustavo Flores-Macías, After Neoliberalism? The Left and Economic Reforms in Latin America, 2012) who underscore the role of structural or institutional factors, the main emphasis of The Triumph of Politics is on these leaders' political strategies, ideas, and claims. Philip and Panizza contend that the mix of old- and new-left positions of these politicians should be taken seriously.
The book's point of departure is that a set of “internationally accepted normative ideas” was articulated at the hemispheric summit held in Miami in 1994, including the desirability of free trade, market reform, good governance, and representative democracy (p. 1). According to the authors, a fundamental criterion setting Chávez, Correa, and Morales apart from the rest of the region is that they have confronted this perspective and refounded politics in their respective countries (p. 4). They reach this conclusion after discussing these leaders' tactics and strategy, rhetoric, relationship with social movements, economic nationalism, and regional economic diplomacy. In particular, the text emphasizes what the authors call “high politics,” defined as the choices made by political actors and their motivations and consequences.
The authors organize the book around three themes, covering each in two chapters. The first section discusses the factors behind the rise to power of Chávez, Correa, and Morales. Chapter 1 focuses on how they reached the presidency and how they have managed to combine legal and extralegal tactics when previous leftist leaders had been ousted or blocked by the military. This chapter presents an overview of recent coups and other forms of military intervention in the three countries, and makes the case that political turbulence was the norm at the time these leaders reached power.
Chapter 2 also focuses on the sources of this instability but from the perspective of protest movements. It discusses how civil society has become a source of political volatility in the Andes. In particular, it summarizes the evolution of the rise of indigenous politics, with an emphasis on CONAIE (the Confederation of Indigenous Nationalities of Ecuador) and the coca-grower unions in Bolivia, concluding that social mobilizations exposed deep social divisions and a deficit of representation in both countries.
The middle section of the book focuses on the ways in which the three leaders have preserved and consolidated power. Chapter 3 switches the emphasis from contextual factors to the three leaders, analyzed through the lens of populism. The chapter argues that Chávez, Correa, and Morales are populists since they “appealed directly to the people against their countries' political and economic orders, divided the social field into antagonistic camps, and promised redistribution and recognition in a newly founded institutional order” (p. 73). Employing labels such as “plebiscitarian politics” and “populist democracy” to characterize their presidencies, the authors emphasize these leaders' anti-system and anti–U.S. rhetoric, and summarize key events in each presidency regarding elections, constitutional conventions, and referenda.
Chapter 4 looks at the plebiscitarian tactics employed by these leaders to consolidate power. It suggests that these tactics are a product of 1) the traditional deadlock of presidential systems in Latin America; 2) the legitimacy that these tactics confer; and 3) the connection between participatory democracy and the twenty-first-century socialism project. The chapter presents a brief overview of the congressional deadlock in the three countries and of the claims that plebiscites are the main reason why Chávez, Correa, and Morales each won his confrontation with congress (p. 112).
The final part of the book moves the discussion toward regional economic and foreign policy issues. Chapter 5 focuses on the importance of natural resource wealth to advance these leaders' goals. Concentrating mostly on Venezuela and with a brief discussion of Bolivia, the authors describe how these leaders intervened in the hydrocarbons industries to redistribute wealth, in contrast to their predecessors' attempts to privilege efficiency and autonomy.
Chapter 6 focuses on regional diplomacy and the competing interests advanced by Brazil and Venezuela. It discusses the factors behind the region's inability to accomplish hemispheric trade integration. The discussion is framed in the context of declining US influence in Latin America, the emergence of a multipolar order, and the competition between Venezuela and Brazil for regional hegemony (p. 150). This is done through an overview of three main regional mechanisms aimed at establishing independence from the United States, and in which the two countries jockey to project influence: the Southern Common Market (MERCOSUR), the Union of South American Nations (UNASUR), and the Bolivarian Alliance for the Americas (ALBA).
In the conclusion, the authors seek to clarify the book's emphasis on the “return of politics” and point to the three leftist presidents' creation of an alternative vision in the region—one based on the rejection of the principles of representative democracy and free markets (p. 174). They argue that no consensus has emerged to replace the “Miami Consensus;” instead, the region has become more heterogeneous. Pointing to Latin America's long tradition of charismatic leaders, they suggest that this type of “radical populism” will likely continue in the future.
The Triumph of Politics is a good primer for those interested in learning about contemporary politics in Bolivia, Ecuador, and Venezuela. It is written in accessible prose and discusses a number of political, economic, and social dimensions in general terms. It provides extensive background, which should prove helpful for those looking for a broad historical perspective, while focusing on a handful of salient recent events.
Those looking for a nuanced scrutiny of leftist governments' policies in these countries, however, are unlikely to be fully satisfied. The book is not meant to engage the literature on the rise of the Left or leftist governments' policies, nor does it present a systematic evaluation of the leadership-based claims advanced by the authors. Instead, it suffers from a common shortcoming of leadership-based approaches, namely, the difficulty in transcending highly contingent factors identified as driving political outcomes. This difficulty is reflected in the ambivalence of the book regarding the extent to which its claims are generalizable: Although for the most part it emphasizes country-specific factors and goes out of its way to distinguish Chávez, Correa, and Morales from leaders in the rest of the region, at the same time it characterizes them as “representative cases of radical left populism in contemporary Latin America” (p. 75).
These considerations notwithstanding, this is a good introductory text for the general public, journalists, and students of Andean and Latin American politics.
