Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-mzp66 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-11T20:04:33.917Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Reorganizing Popular Politics: Participation and the New Interest Regime in Latin America. Edited by Ruth Berins Collier and Samuel Handlin. University Park: Penn State University Press, 2010. 408p. $65.00 cloth, $30.00 paper.

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 March 2013

Daniel H. Levine*
Affiliation:
University of Michigan
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Type
Book Reviews: Comparative Politics
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 2013 

This important book provides a systematic and genuinely comparative effort to describe and explain the origins, operations, and impact of changing patterns of interest representation in contemporary Latin America. The editors and authors draw on a set of surveys administered in 2002 and 2003 in the metropolitan areas of the capital cities of Argentina, Chile, Peru, and Venezuela. They use the data from these surveys effectively to map the evolution of associational life and representation, and to explore the difference that new patterns make to the quality of individual and group participation and representation.

The argument of Reorganizing Popular Politics hinges on the transition from a pattern of group formation and linkage geared to political party–trade union ties (“UP-Hub”) to one characterized by multiple associations that are tied together in networks with differing degrees of structure and scope (“A-Net”). The dynamics of this transition are conditioned everywhere by the timing and circumstances of economic crisis, which undermines the ability of established political parties, party systems, and affiliated organizations to maintain themselves and sustain their ties with organized groups.

Working off this main story, the authors give particular stress to four issues: 1) variation in the scope and intensity of participation; 2) the ways in which new associations manage, if at all, the business of “scaling up,” that is, organizing a chain of linkages and impacts that move interest representation from smaller to larger stages with some hope of effectiveness; 3) state–associational ties and the limits to associational autonomy; and 4) sources of representational distortion, which are mostly attributed to inequalities of class and education.

The contrast among national cases is striking, if not very surprising. The collapse of party systems of the UP-Hub genre is associated with the emergence and expansion of associational networks as an alternative. This is most notable in Peru and least visible in Venezuela, where although the old party system did collapse, all organizations came under severe pressure, pressure that has only been magnified with the efforts of the Chávez regime to reconstruct organizations through state sponsored and controlled networks of groups. Argentina presents what the authors call a Statal Web, with associations tied to interactions with the state and closely linked to Peronista networks. Chile is described as a Liberal Net, with less state dependence and weaker links, a heritage of the Pinochet-era attacks on preexisting groups and networks.

Although the book's title speaks of “popular politics” (basically equivalent to the politics and action repertoires of poorer and less educated citizens), and the theme is repeated throughout, what the analysis and data show is that middle- and upper-class citizens fare better in the new A-Net patterns, where their specific advantages of education, money, time, and connections are felt more effectively.

The book is organized thematically. Three chapters on “Interest Politics and the Popular Sectors” introduce the surveys, provide context on the cases and on broad regional trends, and outline key elements of the contrasting UP-Hub and A-Net patterns. Subsequent chapters address evolving patterns of individual participation, with attention to the choice between direct-action protest and group-mediated participation (Chapters 4 and 5), group structure, linkages across levels, and action repertoires (Chapters 6, 7, and 8) . A general conclusion draws these themes together around the central motif of the transition from UP-Hub to A-Net.

Reorganizing Popular Politics is unduly difficult to read and occasionally frustrating. The editors and authors indulge a predilection for classification, typologies, acronyms, and coined terms that sometimes substitute for clear explanation. Frustration arises because the editors and authors are very cautious about drawing conclusions and implications, limiting themselves instead to mapping the patterns they find (p. 328). This sometimes leads to findings that are, to say the least, not surprising. Thus, for example, “better linked associations are far more likely than atomized associations to engage in a range of state-targeted strategies” (p. 229). The more general point worth taking from the analysis of state-association ties is that notions of organizational autonomy that are central to much of the new social movement literature are not very accurate. Most associations seek and compete for ties with the state. Those with more resources and better connections manage the process better.

The book continues themes advanced in Ruth Berins Collier and David Collier's Shaping the Political Arena (1991) and marries them to concerns arising from a very different literature on new social movements. Although the fit is sometimes difficult, the overall result is a valuable book that rewards the effort required to read it, with rich and useful insights about the evolution of associational life and representation, as well as the likely shape of future patterns. The authors demonstrate that despite widespread belief that civil society is fragmented and weak in Latin America, participation remains high and groups are continually exploring new ways of coordinating with one another in a search for more effective representation and links with the state. These efforts often do not succeed, or if they succeed, they do not endure for very long, a result that can be traced to long-term class and institutional rigidities.