5 - The Reactivation of Charismatic Attachments

Summary

Chapter five investigates how citizens’ charismatic attachments can be politically reactivated to facilitate new politicians’ consolidation of power. In particular, I argue that successors must depict themselves as symbolic reincarnations of the founder to reanimate the political significance of the followers’ attachments and garner support as new standard-bearers of the movement. Specifically, new leaders must implement two strategies: (1) bold, initially impressive policies and (2) symbolic associations with the charismatic founder. Face-to-face survey experiments conducted with movement followers in Argentina and Venezuela indicate that political candidates who implement these two strategies cause citizens to express stronger emotional attachment to the movement and increased support for the new leader. The results further challenge the notion that charismatic attachments are short-lived and underscore the potential of new leaders to resurrect the political intensity of those attachments.

Thus far, this book has investigated the revival of charismatic movements from the perspective of the followers. Chapter 3 demonstrated how unmediated, emotional attachments form between the followers and their heroic leader, while Chapter 4 illustrated how these bonds develop into an enduring identity that continues to shape followers’ worldview after the leader dies. Because this identity remains anchored in the supporters’ direct, emotional connections to the leader, it shapes their understanding of politics and expectations of future politicians in starkly personalistic terms. Thus, rather than viewing their politicians as ordinary public servants, the followers hold politicians to the standard of the charismatic founder. As reflected in the focus groups conducted with followers of Peronism and Chavismo, these individuals expect new leaders to embody the founder by performing heroic feats, providing tangible benefits, and fulfilling the founder’s mission of transcendence.

In light of these findings, I argue that successors must demonstrate their worthiness of the founder’s mantle in order to satisfy the followers’ expectations and win their support. Specifically, politicians who depict themselves as symbolic reincarnations of the founder have the potential to reactivate the political significance of the followers’ charismatic identity and garner support as new standard-bearers of the movement. This process of reactivating citizens’ attachments, which hinges in large part on the strategies undertaken by new leaders, is essential for the political revival of charismatic movements. Without successors who can harness the emotional power of citizens’ preexisting attachments, the movement is unlikely to reclaim its predominant position in politics.

This chapter investigates the strategies that new leaders must implement to reinvigorate citizens’ deep, affective ties to the movement and garner support. Drawing on insights from studies in political psychology, sociology, leadership, and electoral campaigns, I contend that successors must enact two strategies – one material and one symbolic – to achieve this ambitious task. First, successors must establish their own charisma by proposing and implementing bold policies that translate into tangible benefits for the followers and alleviate widespread suffering. Second, successors must cultivate symbolic ties to the founder to associate their charisma with the founder’s glorified legacy and demonstrate their commitment to fulfilling the founder’s mission to transform the followers’ lives.

To test whether and how new leaders can associate themselves with their charismatic predecessor’s legacy to revive citizens’ affective ties and win political support, I analyze original, face-to-face survey experiments conducted with 999 movement followers in Argentina and Venezuela.¹ Specifically, I construct a 2×2 experimental design in which a potential successor running for president implements (or does not implement) a set of strategic cues related to bold policies and symbolic ties to the founder.

Contrary to studies of routinization, which suggest that charismatic attachments cannot survive in personalistic form beyond the founder’s death, the results indicate that citizens’ deep, emotional ties to Peronism and Chavismo endure. These findings corroborate the focus group evidence from the previous chapter regarding the survival of citizens’ personalistic identification with the movement.

Moreover, in the context of presidential campaigns, the survey experiment reveals that a new leader’s bold, initially successful policies and symbolic ties to the founder can politically reactivate followers’ attachments by intensifying the followers’ positive feelings toward the movement, enhancing their perceptions of the new leader’s charisma, and boosting the leader’s support. In short, these results indicate that, while the personalistic nature of citizens’ attachments remains relatively constant over time, the intensity of those attachments can shift based on the coming and going of new leaders who claim to embody the founder.

The remainder of the chapter develops and tests my theory on new leaders’ reactivation of the followers’ charismatic attachments. In the next section, I briefly review the process through which charismatic attachments between leaders and followers initially develop and explain how new politicians can reactivate those ties to garner support. I then lay out the hypotheses, design, and results of the survey experiment conducted in Argentina and Venezuela. Finally, I discuss the substantive implications of the findings. In subsequent chapters, I examine the conditions that shape new leaders’ capacity to enact these strategies of reactivation and analyze how, together, these strategies and conditions cause charismatic movements to develop fitful trajectories that undermine the development of stable, programmatic party systems.

5.1 A Theory of Charismatic Attachment Reactivation

5.1.1 A Review of Attachment Formation

I begin by reviewing the three conditions that the founders must satisfy to initially establish charismatic bonds with their followers. These conditions are important because they inform the strategies that successors use later on to reactivate the attachments. First, the founder directly recognizes the suffering of citizens who feel they have been excluded by mainstream society. The founder focuses on these individuals because their unfavorable circumstances make them more likely to look for a savior to rescue them (Bandura 1982; Madsen and Snow 1991; Merolla and Zechmeister 2011; Spruyt, Keppens, and Van Droogenbroeck 2016; Weyland 2003).

Second, to secure these citizens’ devotion, the founder demonstrates the capacity to single-handedly resolve their misery. Specifically, he must provide “proof” of his charismatic power by promising and implementing bold policies that showcase seemingly miraculous abilities (Pappas 2012; Weber 1922/1978, 242). From the followers’ perspective, the daring character and capacity of these policies to confer material benefits – rather than programmatic content and long-term sustainability of the policies – are essential for substantiating the leader’s extraordinary abilities. Once implemented, these policies confirm the founder’s superhuman image and can temporarily protect him from subsequent drops in performance (Merolla and Zechmeister 2011, 30).

Third, the leader cultivates a narrative that glorifies his position as the people’s savior, demonizes opposing groups as enemies blocking the people’s path to salvation, and stresses the founder’s promise to transform the society and deliver prosperity to the followers. This narrative, which frames the leader’s mission as an all-out battle against evil forces, infuses followers’ attachments with a profound moral intensity. Thus, the followers’ support for the leader rests not just on much-needed recognition and tangible goods, but also on a deep sense of righteousness that inspires religious devotion to the leader, whom the followers come to view as brave and selfless (Zúquete 2008, 106).

As shown in Chapter 4, the founder’s narrative is especially important for the survival of charismatic movements because it develops citizens’ initial attachments into an enduring and deeply personalistic identity. This identity, in turn, shapes the followers’ worldview, reinforces their belief in the founder’s mission of ultimate salvation, and thus influences their political preferences and expectations even after the founder has disappeared. In particular, the identity provides citizens with a “framework that allows [them] … to make sense of social, political, and economic conditions” that occurred in the past, are unfolding in the present, or are yet to occur (Abdelal et al. 2009, 24–25). It also gives these individuals “ways of recognizing, identifying, and classifying other people, of constructing sameness and difference, and of ‘coding’ and making sense of their actions” (Abdelal et al. 2009, 25; Brubaker, Loveman, and Stamatov 2004, 47). As a worldview, then, the followers’ identification with a charismatic leader can shape their perceptions and evaluations of future politicians.

5.1.2 Strategies of Attachment Reactivation

Political psychologists suggest that, over time, various factors can shift the political intensity of a preexisting identity. In other words, the identity can be politically deflated or recharged depending on the circumstances. In the context of charismatic movements, as described in Chapter 4, the prolonged absence of the leader can cause the emotional charge of citizens’ identification with the leader’s charismatic movement to fade. While remaining profoundly attached to the charismatic founder and his redemptive mission, identifiers can become disillusioned with the current political landscape. However, a change in circumstances – specifically, the eruption of a crisis – can make the followers feel threatened and cause them to look for a new savior to rescue them from the situation, which creates the potential for new leaders to reactivate the followers’ attachments to the founder and movement (Huddy 2013, 15, 44; Merolla and Zechmeister 2009a, 27–28; Weyland 2003, 839).

Once a crisis occurs, causing widespread feelings of anxiety and desperation, politicians can strategically manipulate the intensity of citizens’ attachments by portraying themselves as model, “prototypical” members of the group (Huddy 2013, 12, 18). Potential successors have several incentives to engage this strategy. Namely, doing so can strengthen the impact of citizens’ attachments on their political preferences and increase political engagement – the combination of which can mobilize a strong base of support for the new leader (Citrin and Sears 2009, 148; Cramer 2016, 12; Klar 2013, 1108). Moreover, research suggests that successors who depict themselves as symbolic archetypes of the identity – that is, the beloved founder – tend to appear more trustworthy and charismatic to fellow identifiers (Huddy 2013, 18; Haslam, Reicher, and Platow 2011, 96, 101–3; Hogg 2001, 190).

To reactivate citizens’ attachments, new leaders must disseminate cues through speech, symbolic gestures, and policies that associate the core symbols and values of the identity with the current context and the leader’s personal profile (Cramer 2016, 12; Huddy 2013, 12; Klar 2013, 1108; Meléndez and Rovira Kaltwasser 2019, 3). Specifically, I argue that successors who enact two cues – one material and one symbolic – similar to those implemented by the founder can reactivate citizens’ deep, unmediated, emotional ties to the movement. If successfully executed, these cues signal to the followers that the leader embodies the founder and is committed to reviving his mission.

In material terms, successors must promise and enact bold, initially successful policies to prove their extraordinary power to rescue the people. This impressive performance signals their potential to fill the founder’s shoes and convinces the followers that the new leaders are capable of delivering salvation. To demonstrate herculean abilities, the successors’ policies must prioritize the rapid delivery of tangible benefits to the followers over programmatic coherence and sustainability. Though it is difficult for successors to implement this cue at the national level before becoming chief executive, past records of bold, impressive performance as subnational executive officeholders – for example, as governors – can provide followers with an initial cue regarding the successors’ potential to fulfill their heroic promises.

Once implemented, this material cue should cause followers to evaluate the successors’ performance in highly favorable terms. More importantly, however, the cue should reignite the followers’ passion for and identification with the movement by convincing them that an authentic savior has emerged to pick up the founder’s baton and deliver a prosperous future. In other words, more than simply demonstrating good performance, this cue should enhance the followers’ emotional attachments to the movement and increase their charismatic perceptions of the successor.

Symbolically, successors must weave themselves into the founder’s narrative by depicting themselves as true heirs and demonstrating their commitment to his mission of societal transformation. This requires successors to update the original narrative to fit with their personae and the contemporary circumstances. To do so, the leaders emphasize aspects of the founder that they share – such as tone of voice, word choice, dress, and physical gestures – while deemphasizing aspects they do not have in common. Additionally, successors can frame their opponents as traditional enemies of the movement to strengthen followers’ support. They can also portray their policies – whose substantive content may differ from the policies of the founder – as achieving the same end goal: providing the followers with immediate relief and eventual salvation. To enact this set of symbolic cues, successors communicate them through verbal, auditory, and visual channels in order to repeatedly remind the followers of the charismatic founder, reinvigorate the followers’ feelings of excitement for the founder’s transformative mission, and convince the followers that the successors are worthy of the founder’s mantle.

In sum, my theory of charismatic attachment reactivation challenges the logic of routinization, which suggests that these affective bonds must transform into depersonalized linkages to survive and remain politically relevant after the founder disappears. Instead, I contend that the followers sustain a deep, emotional identification with the movement that reinforces their commitment to the founder’s heroic mission to transform society, shapes their worldview, and influences their expectations of future politicians. Subsequent leaders can therefore reactivate followers’ attachments and gain support by (1) promising and implementing bold policies that deliver tangible benefits to the followers and (2) symbolically linking themselves to the charismatic founder and his transformative project.

5.2 Testing the Reactivation of Charismatic Attachments: Evidence from Survey Experiments

I adopt an experimental approach to test the individual and combined effects of successors’ bold policies and symbolic ties on the followers’ expressions of emotional attachment to the movement and support for the heir. In particular, I draw on the priming, cue-taking, and identity literatures from political psychology (Abdelal et al. 2009; Hogg 2001; Klar 2013; Tajfel 1974; Van Vugt and Hart 2004) to design a survey experiment with two manipulations that represent strategic cues enacted by a hypothetical candidate seeking the presidency: bold policies and symbolic ties to the charismatic founder. The first manipulation corresponds to the material cue: the promise and implementation of bold policies. Because it is ultimately the fulfillment of these policies that “proves” the successor’s charisma, I manipulate whether or not the candidate has fulfilled his bold, tangible promises to resolve citizens’ most pressing problems in the past. The second manipulation, which represents the symbolic cue, incorporates visual and auditory symbols that associate the candidate with the charismatic founder of the movement. I construct a 2x2 design with four conditions such that respondents are randomly assigned to receive both, one, or neither of the two cues. Next, I measure the respondents’ expressions of attachment to the movement and support for the successor (see Table 5.1).

Table 5.1. 2 × 2: Experimental conditions and summary of hypotheses

	Presence of Symbolic Ties	Absence of Symbolic Ties
Fulfilled Bold Policies	Fulfilled/Symbol (Expect strong attachment and support for the successor)	Fulfilled/No Symbol (Expect middling attachment and support for the successor)
Unfulfilled Bold Policies	Unfulfilled/Symbol (Expect middling attachment and support for the successor)	Unfulfilled/No Symbol (Expect low attachment and support for the successor)

5.2.1 Hypotheses

Based on my theory, I develop three sets of hypotheses about the combined and marginal effects of bold policies and symbolic ties on followers’ charismatic attachments to the movement and support for the successor.

HI. Candidates who combine the material and symbolic cues can revive citizens’ emotional attachments and garner support more effectively than candidates who implement only one or neither of the two cues. Thus:

1. A. Respondents in the fulfilled/symbol condition will express the strongest attachment to the movement. Specifically, they will identify most intensely with the movement and will express the strongest positive feelings and weakest negative feelings toward the movement.

2. B. Respondents in the fulfilled/symbol condition will express the strongest support for the candidate. Specifically, they will perceive the candidate as most charismatic and will express the strongest intentions to vote for the candidate in future elections.

HII. Both bold policies and symbolic ties to the founder are necessary for successors to fully reactivate citizens’ attachments and garner support. The bold policies demonstrate the successor’s charismatic power, while symbolic ties associate the successors’ heroic capacity with the founder and his redemptive mission. Correspondingly, each of the two cues should not be as effective when applied in isolation. Nevertheless, candidates who implement only one of the two cues should elicit stronger attachment and support than candidates who use neither cue. In short:

1. A. Respondents in the fulfilled/no symbol condition and in the unfulfilled/symbol condition will express stronger attachment to the movement than respondents in the unfulfilled/no symbol condition.

2. B. Respondents in the fulfilled/no symbol condition and in the unfulfilled/symbol condition will express stronger support for the candidate than respondents in the unfulfilled/no symbol condition.

HIII. Finally, symbolic ties increase followers’ support for the candidate because they link the candidate directly to the movement’s charismatic founder and thus intensify the followers’ deep, emotional identification with the movement. Therefore:

1. A. Followers’ identification with the movement will mediate the effect of symbolic ties on support for the candidate.

5.2.2 Participants, Design, and Procedure

In partnership with two local public opinion firms – Trespuntozero in Argentina and Consultores 21 in Venezuela² – I conducted face-to-face survey experiments with a sample of each movement’s most important and consistent base of followers: self-identified Peronist and Chavista adults (18 and older) from the “popular” (lower- and lower-middle-class) sectors.³ While it would be interesting to analyze the impact of successors’ material and symbolic cues on non-followers as well as middle- and upper-class citizens, I limited the scope of the present study due to theoretical expectations and resource constraints. First, I focused on movement followers rather than all citizens because the experiment aims to test the potential reactivation of existing attachments rather than the formation of new attachments among previously unaffiliated individuals. Certainly, political candidates should also endeavor to expand their support base by incorporating new voters. Yet, because the movement followers constitute a sizeable proportion of the population – about one-third of the electorate in both Argentina and Venezuela (Briceño 2015a; Calvo and Murillo 2012) – earning their loyalty provides new leaders an enviable “electoral cushion” (Levitsky 2003, 13–14). To narrow the sample in this way, respondents were asked a screening question in which they indicated which of several political traditions they felt closest to. Those who selected “Peronism” or “Chavismo” were included in the study.⁴

Second, I limited the sample to followers from the popular rather than the middle and upper classes because my theory suggests that socioeconomically marginalized citizens are more likely to experience seemingly unmanageable challenges, suffer disproportionately, and develop feelings of low self-efficacy. Popular-sector citizens are therefore more likely to look for and become emotionally attached to a leader whom they perceive as heroic (Burns 1978 Madsen and Snow 1991). Furthermore, in both Argentina and Venezuela, these low-income citizens make up the largest group of movement followers and a vital source of support for political candidates (Briceño 2015a; Calvo and Murillo 2012). As suggested by public opinion specialists in both countries, education was used as a proxy for socioeconomic status; respondents with less than a college degree were included.⁵

In sum, while the population of interest in this study – movement followers from the popular sectors – is limited, it provides a crucial foundation of support for aspiring political candidates. To approximate a nationally representative sample of this population, the experiment was fielded in three diverse regions of each country: the federal capital and its outskirts, an urban and traditionally anti-Peronist/anti-Chavista region, and a rural, traditionally pro-Peronist/pro-Chavista region (see Table 5.2). Many studies of Peronism and Chavismo focus exclusively on the federal capital, which, while populous and politically important, has distinct characteristics compared to the rest of the country. In contrast, this three-region design better captures the followers’ attitudes and behaviors at the national level, accounting for demographic, cultural, and political variation.

Table 5.2. Characteristics of selected regions

Selection Criteria	Argentina	Venezuela
Federal Capital and Outskirts	Lanús, La Matanza (Province of Buenos Aires)	Caracas (State of Miranda)
Urban, Anti-Peronist/Anti-Chavista Region	Córdoba (Province of Córdoba)	Maracaibo (State of Zulia)
Rural, pro-Peronist/Pro-Chavista region	La Rioja (Province of La Rioja)	Cumaná (State of Sucre)

The survey experiment was designed as follows. Respondents were randomly assigned to one of the four experimental conditions, each of which provided information about a hypothetical governor running for president.⁶ After a set of filter questions intended to restrict the sample to individuals from the population of interest, enumerators carefully explained the scenario, verified respondents’ understanding, and proceeded to one of the four randomly assigned experimental manipulations, described below.

To maximize external validity, the two sets of manipulations – one for fulfillment/un-fulfillment of bold policies and a second for the presence/absence of symbolic ties – imitated stimuli that voters would encounter in a real presidential campaign. I developed each manipulation with the assistance and feedback of local campaign strategists, in-depth interviews and pretests with individuals from the population of interest, and, in Argentina, a pilot survey distributed online via email and Facebook (N = 239). To enhance internal validity, the survey was conducted in face-to-face format with local, trained enumerators to ensure that respondents understood the scenario and received the correct manipulations.⁷ Manipulation checks (described subsequently) further verified that each stimulus achieved its intended purpose.

For the two conditions in which bold policies were enacted (fulfilled), the enumerator described to the respondent the candidate’s successful completion of bold policies as governor, emphasizing impressive, tangible benefits he provided to popular-sector citizens in his province/state. For the remaining two conditions (unfulfilled), the enumerator indicated the candidate’s failure to implement the same policies as governor. To stress the daring character of the candidate’s policies, exaggerated wording was used, such as the promise to “end” (rather than reduce) poverty, “eliminate” unemployment, and “combat” crime. The policies also addressed real citizens’ most pressing concerns, as indicated by surveys conducted no more than three months prior to fielding the study (economic crisis, unemployment, and poverty in Argentina; economic crisis, crime, and food shortages in Venezuela). Finally, to personalize and enhance the emotional persuasiveness of the scenario, I used an episodic frame (a personal anecdote) rather than a thematic frame (factual information) to depict the candidate’s successful/failed implementation of bold policies (Iyengar 1994; Klar 2013). Prioritizing emotional responses to the candidate’s policies in this way corresponds to my theory that the implementation of bold, initially impressive policies strengthens followers’ charismatic – deeply emotional and personalistic – attachments to the movement.

Next, respondents were exposed to auditory and visual cues representing the presence/absence of the candidate’s symbolic ties to the founder.⁸ First, respondents listened to a 90-second speech by the candidate using headphones provided by the enumerator. The speech was recorded rather than printed because voters tend to listen to, rather than read, candidate speeches in the context of presidential campaigns. Each speech was developed based on several real speeches made by prominent movement leaders including Carlos Menem and Cristina Kirchner in Argentina and Nicolás Maduro and Henri Falcón in Venezuela.⁹ In each country, local campaign experts with public speaking experience recorded the speech.

In both versions of the speech, the candidate reflected on the country’s current state of affairs and expressed bold promises that he would fulfill if elected. Next, in the two conditions in which symbolic ties were present (symbol), the candidate mentioned the founder by name (Perón/Chávez), referred to the followers using a typical in-group label (comrades/the Bolivarian people), and stressed the transformational character of the movement.¹⁰ Conversely, in the two conditions where symbolic ties were absent (no symbol), the candidate did not mention the founder’s name, used a neutral label for the voters (compatriots/the Venezuelan people), and referred to progress in terms of realistic development rather than using the more grandiose and missionary language of transformation. The remaining content, tone, and length of the speech in each country were held constant across all four conditions.

While listening to the candidate’s speech, participants viewed a card with an image of the candidate’s campaign poster, which was also designed based on materials from recent presidential campaigns and feedback from local experts.¹¹ Each version of the poster contained a generic campaign slogan (Opportunity for All/Together with the People), a solid color background, an image of children, the candidate’s name, the title “President,” and a picture of the candidate from the chest up.¹² In the version with symbolic ties, the background color corresponded to the movement (celeste/red) and the image featured the founder among the children. The version without symbolic ties had a generic background color unaffiliated with any major political party in the country, and the image of children did not include the founder.¹³

Following exposure to one of the four randomly assigned conditions, respondents answered a range of survey questions regarding their emotional attachment to the movement and support for the candidate – the dependent variables of the study. To measure emotional attachment, respondents were asked how Peronist/Chavista they felt on a scale from 0 to 10. They were also asked to indicate the intensity of their positive and negative feelings toward the movement on four-point scales including pride, excitement, and hope; anger, disappointment, and fear. Due to the high interitem correlation between the three survey items for positive and negative feelings, respectively, I collapsed each set into an additive index and rescaled it to range from 0 to 10.¹⁴ I interpreted statistically significant increases in the former two measures and a significant decrease in the latter as successful reactivation of citizens’ emotional attachments to the movement.¹⁵

To measure support for the candidate, respondents were first asked a series of questions regarding their perceptions of the candidate’s charisma. Based on my theory, a compelling leader who materially and symbolically embodies the founder’s heroic image should appear significantly more charismatic to the followers – especially if the candidate is to consolidate his own personalistic authority.

To operationalize the candidate’s charisma, respondents were asked to indicate their level of agreement on a four-point scale with three statements about his selflessness, vision of the future, and capacity to solve the country’s problems. While charisma is difficult to measure quantitatively, these items have been validated in previous studies of charisma in Latin America and represent key components of the concept as outlined in my theory. I drew the first two of these statements from a five-question charisma battery developed by Merolla and Zechmeister to assess citizens’ perceptions of leaders’ charisma in Mexico and Venezuela.¹⁶ I selected the following items: “[Leader’s name] articulates a compelling vision of the future,” and “[Leader’s name] goes beyond his own self-interest for the good of the group.”¹⁷ The first reflects the leader’s enactment of the founder’s mission to establish a more prosperous future for the followers; the second relates to the leader’s willingness to sacrifice personal goals to fulfill this righteous mission on behalf of the followers. I incorporated the third statement – “[the leader] is capable of resolving [Argentina’s / Venezuela’s] problems” – to capture respondents’ perceptions of the leader’s heroic capacity to resolve their misery. Though this statement is not included in Merolla and Zechmeister’s battery, it comprises a central component of my definition of charisma that is also stressed by Weber: the leader’s extraordinary ability to solve the people’s problems. Unlike survey questions in which respondents are prompted to explicitly evaluate the candidate’s economic performance (which was also incorporated in the study as a manipulation check, described subsequently), the broader and more prospective nature of this statement better (if imperfectly) captures whether the candidate inspires and convinces the followers of his/her heroic potential – a crucial component of charisma. I collapsed this three-item charisma battery into an additive index and rescaled to range from 0 to 10.¹⁸

In addition to the charisma battery, I included a survey question to measure respondents’ intention to vote for the candidate in future elections. Whereas charismatic perceptions indicate respondents’ potential to form emotional ties to the leader, this item provides a more concrete measure of support that is also necessary for the leader’s consolidation of power. This item was also rescaled to range from 0 to 10 in both countries. Further details regarding all survey questions, including wording and response options, can be found in online Appendix C.

5.2.3 Manipulation Checks

The survey included additional questions to verify that the experimental manipulations had their intended effects. For bold policies, respondents were asked to evaluate the candidate’s performance as governor on a four-point scale. As expected, respondents in the two conditions where the candidate fulfilled bold policies as governor rated his performance significantly higher than respondents in the two conditions where he failed to implement the policies (M_Policies = 3.21 vs. M_{No Policies} = 2.19, p < .05 in Argentina; M_Policies = 3.11 vs. M_{No Policies} = 2.42, p < .05 in Venezuela).

To verify the symbolic manipulation, respondents were asked to evaluate how Peronist/Chavista the candidate appeared on a scale from 0 to 10. On average, respondents in the two conditions with symbolic ties perceived the candidate as more Peronist/Chavista than in the two conditions without symbolic ties (M_Symbol = 6.98 vs. M_{No Symbol} = 6.46, p < .05 in Argentina; M_Symbol = 7.56 vs. M_{No Symbol} = 5.63, p < .05 in Venezuela). These data suggest that respondents in both countries received the correct cues for both sets of manipulations.

5.2.4 Results

HI : The combined effects of bold policies and symbolic ties cause followers to express the strongest (A) attachment to the movement and (B) support for the candidate.

For the most part, the results support HI, suggesting that the combined effect of bold policies and symbolic ties cause followers to express the most intense emotional attachment to the movement and the greatest support for the candidate. Specifically, in Argentina, respondents who received both cues (fulfilled/symbol) expressed the strongest identification with Peronism, the most intense positive feelings, and the weakest negative feelings toward the movement, providing strong support for HI(A). Pairwise difference-of-means tests demonstrate that, on average, the joint effects of fulfilled bold policies and symbolic ties had a significantly greater, positive impact on followers’ expressions of emotional attachment based on these three indicators. The differences were statistically significant (p ≤ .09) in seven of nine pairwise comparisons between the fulfilled/symbol condition and each of the remaining conditions. The two differences that did not reach statistical significance – between fulfilled/symbol and unfulfilled/symbol for Peronist identification and for positive feelings toward Peronism – were in the hypothesized direction, with larger scores in the fulfilled/symbol condition.

Likewise, Argentine respondents exposed to both fulfilled bold policies and symbolic ties endorsed the candidate most enthusiastically, supporting HI(B). On average, respondents in the fulfilled/symbol condition perceived the candidate as more charismatic. These respondents also expressed greater willingness to vote for the candidate than respondents in the remaining conditions. All difference-of-means tests between this condition and each remaining condition were positive and significant (p ≤ .076). Figure 5.1A and B present graphical illustrations of the results and Figure 5.2 shows pairwise t-tests between the fulfilled/symbol condition and each of the three remaining conditions (full ANOVA results and p-values for all pairwise t-tests are presented in online Appendix C).

Figure 5.1. Mean levels of movement attachment and candidate support by experimental condition in Argentina

Figure 5.2. Difference of means in Argentina for hypothesis I: Pairwise t-tests

In Venezuela, the results for HI are mixed. To begin, HI(A) is not supported: In terms of movement attachment, respondents expressed equally strong identification with and feelings toward Chavismo across all four conditions, suggesting that neither bold policies nor symbolic ties had a noticeable effect. Moreover, the Venezuelan respondents expressed much higher and more concentrated levels of attachment than their Argentine counterparts. As shown in Table 5.3, in Argentina, the mean score for identification with Peronism across the four conditions was 6.45 with a standard deviation of 2.44, the mean score for positive feelings was 6.67 with a standard deviation of 2.90, and the mean score for negative feelings was 4.08 with a standard deviation of 2.77. Conversely, in Venezuela, the mean score for identification with Chavismo was 8.54 and a standard deviation of 2.12, the mean for positive feelings was 8.87 with a standard deviation of 1.76, and the mean for negative feelings was 1.57 with a standard deviation of 2.17. In other words, overall, the lower intensity and greater dispersion of attachments in Argentina allowed for differences to reveal themselves across the four conditions, whereas the “ceiling effects” for attachment in Venezuela suppressed any potential differences.

Table 5.3. Descriptive statistics for movement attachment and candidate support

Variable	Argentina		Venezuela
	Mean	Std. Dev.	Mean	Std. Dev.
Movement ID	6.45	2.44	8.54	2.12
Positive Feelings	6.33	2.90	8.87	1.76
Negative Feelings	4.08	2.77	1.57	2.17
Charisma	5.28	2.66	6.01	3.13
Vote Intent	5.17	3.18	6.46	3.97

I suspect that these ceiling effects emerged in Venezuela due to the recent nature of Chávez’s death, just four years before the survey was conducted. Because Chávez’s followers continue to mourn his passing, it is likely that their attachments to his legacy remain highly activated, resulting in the expression of particularly raw, powerful, and concentrated feelings toward Chavismo – regardless of the behavior of new leaders. Indeed, the survey experiment was administered just four years after Chávez’s death, during the rule of Chávez’s handpicked successor, Nicolás Maduro – who leaned heavily on symbolic connections to Chávez and likely intensified the emotional salience of the founder’s legacy even further. Conversely, Perón died over forty years before the survey was conducted in Argentina. Given the passage of several decades since the founder’s death, followers’ attachments to Peronism are likely to be more nuanced than their Venezuelan counterparts. Argentines who are not exposed to a new leader implementing Peronist cues may therefore be less likely to express their attachments as enthusiastically.

While the Venezuelan respondents’ relatively uniform and intense expressions of attachment to Chavismo fail to provide support for HI(A), the results nevertheless attest to the staying power of charismatic attachments in the wake of the founder’s death. Indeed, the routinization thesis suggests that citizens’ attachments to the movement begin to fade away when the founder disappears, yet in Venezuela, the experimental results suggest that, four years after Chávez’s death, many citizens’ deeply affective attachments to his movement remain as strong as ever. Still, the comparison of results between Venezuela and Argentina suggests that, over the course of several decades, as the founder’s original rule grows more distant, it is possible that the emotional intensity of citizens’ attachments to the movement begins to dissipate – albeit much more slowly than routinization scholars indicate. Furthermore, as will be discussed subsequently, it seems likely that the relative importance of the material and symbolic components of the charismatic attachment may shift over time.

Nevertheless, turning to candidate support, the results in Venezuela uphold HI(B): the combined effects of bold policies and symbolic ties caused followers to express the strongest support for the candidate. On average, relative to all other conditions, respondents in the fulfilled/symbol condition perceived the candidate as significantly more charismatic (p ≈ 0 across all pairwise difference-of-means tests) and were more likely to vote for the candidate in future elections (p ≤ .012 across all pairwise difference-of-means tests). The significance of these findings is noteworthy: while attachments to Chavismo remain strong among all followers, charismatic attachment to and support for new leaders vary based on the extent to which leaders can (a) demonstrate their own heroic capacities by fulfilling bold policies and (b) convincingly tie that heroism to Chávez’s legacy. Thus, to maximize their support, new candidates are incentivized to behave similarly to and associate themselves with the charismatic founder to garner support – actions that perpetuate the founder’s legacy. Figures 5.3A and B present graphical illustrations of the results in Venezuela and Figure 5.4 summarizes pairwise t-tests between the fulfilled/symbol condition and each of the three remaining conditions in Venezuela (full ANOVA results and p-values for all pairwise t-tests are presented in online Appendix C).

Figure 5.3. Mean levels of movement attachment and candidate support by experimental condition in Venezuela

Figure 5.4. Difference of means in Venezuela for hypothesis I: Pairwise t-tests

HII : The marginal effects of bold policies and symbolic ties on followers’ (A) expression of attachment to the movement and (B) support for the candidate are stronger than their combined absence.

The results provide partial support for HII. In terms of movement attachment, respondents in Argentina exposed to either bold policies or symbolic ties generally expressed stronger attachment than respondents exposed to neither of the two cues, supporting HII(A). The results were significant in three of four pairwise t-tests (p ≤ .075), and were in the correct direction in the fourth t-test. However, no significant differences were revealed across the three conditions in terms of negative feelings toward the movement, indicating that, unlike the combined effect of the two cues, the marginal effect of each is insufficient to attenuate respondents’ negative sentiments toward the movement.

As for HII(B), the results from Argentina suggest that bold policies by themselves caused respondents to express stronger support for the candidate, whereas symbolic ties had no significant marginal effect. On average, respondents in the fulfilled/no symbol condition perceived the candidate as more charismatic (p ≈ 0) and expressed greater intentions to vote for the candidate (p = .001) than in the unfulfilled/no symbol condition. In contrast, there was no significant difference between the unfulfilled/symbol condition and the unfulfilled/no symbol condition. These findings suggest that the impact of symbolic ties on voters’ support for the candidate is not as strong as the impact of bold policies. Figure 5.5 displays pairwise t-tests pertaining to Hypothesis II in Argentina.

Figure 5.5. Difference of means in Argentina for hypothesis II: Pairwise t-tests

In Venezuela, no significant differences emerged across the four conditions in terms of movement attachment due to the ceiling effects described earlier. However, the results indicate that the marginal effects of bold policies and symbolic ties significantly influenced the respondents’ support for the candidate, providing partial support for HII(B). On average, respondents in the fulfilled/no symbol and unfulfilled/symbol conditions perceived the candidate as more charismatic than respondents in unfulfilled/no symbol condition (p ≈ 0 and p = .010, respectively). Furthermore, respondents in the unfulfilled/symbol condition expressed significantly greater willingness to vote for the candidate than respondents in the unfulfilled/no symbol condition (p = .054). Figure 5.6 displays pairwise t-tests pertaining to these results in Venezuela.

Figure 5.6. Difference of means in Venezuela for hypothesis II: Pairwise t-tests

A comparison of the results for HII(B) across Argentina and Venezuela yields further insights regarding the marginal effects of the material and symbolic cues on support for the candidate. As Figures 5.1B and 5.3B illustrate, in Argentina, the marginal effect of the material cue surpassed that of the symbolic cue, whereas in Venezuela, the opposite occurred: the marginal effect of the symbolic cue prevailed over the material cue. In other words, on average, Argentine respondents found the candidate who fulfilled bold policies yet had no symbolic ties to Perón to be more charismatic and worthier of their vote; in contrast, Venezuelan respondents tended to prefer the candidate who did not fulfill the policies yet demonstrated his symbolic connection to Chávez!

These findings suggest that the importance of the symbolic and material dimensions of charisma may vary over time, especially as they concern successors’ ability to convince the followers they are worthy of the founder’s mantle. Specifically, it is possible that, in the aftermath of the founder’s disappearance, successors must rely more heavily on the symbolic dimension to portray themselves as rightful heirs. Yet with the passage of time, the material dimension – in particular, the heroic performance of new leaders – may become increasingly consequential for proving their capacity to pick up the founder’s baton and revive the movement. Although these findings are speculative, they reveal interesting nuances about the unique effects of the different dimensions of charisma and open up avenues for future research.

To conclude, the findings reveal that the marginal effects of bold policies and symbolic ties influence followers’ expressions of emotional attachment to the movement, their perceptions of the new leader’s charisma, and their likelihood to vote for the new leader in future elections – though these effects are weaker than the joint effect of the two cues. Interestingly, the marginal effects of each cue vary according to the historical position of the charismatic movement: In Argentina, where the movement’s founder died decades ago, the impact of the symbolic cue is relatively weaker than in Venezuela, where the founder died very recently and the movement remains in power. Still, in both countries, the fulfillment of bold policies appears to have a strong marginal effect on support for the candidate (with the exception of vote intention in Venezuela, perhaps due to the strength of symbolic ties in the current political climate). In contrast, symbolic ties are potentially more important than bold policies for reviving followers’ attachments to the movement. These results reinforce my theory that new leaders must fulfill material and symbolic cues to fully revive the movement in their own name.

HIII : Followers’ identification with the movement will mediate the effect of the symbolic cue on support for the candidate.

Finally, to further examine whether symbolic ties increase followers’ support for the candidate by enhancing their identification with the movement, I turn to the third hypothesis. Following Imai, Keele, and Tingley (2010), I estimate the average causal mediation effect of movement identification on the relationship between symbolic ties and followers’ support for the candidate, measured as charismatic perceptions and vote intention (see online Appendix C for equations and full output of the analysis). In Argentina, the results uphold this hypothesis. The direct and total effects of symbolic ties on charismatic perceptions and vote intent are not significant. More importantly, however, movement attachment has a positive, significant effect (see Table 5.4).¹⁹ In other words, the symbolic cue has a significant but indirect effect on candidate support: Exposure to symbolic ties increases followers’ support for the candidate by intensifying their identification with the movement. Thus, although the results from HII(B) suggest that the influence of the symbolic cue on candidate support may have faded in Argentina in the decades since Perón’s death, the mediation analysis suggests the lingering influence of the symbolic cue on followers’ identification with the movement. In Venezuela, due to the ceiling effects for movement identification across the four experimental conditions, the results were not significant. Nevertheless, the Argentine findings underscore that, in addition to proving their own impressive leadership by implementing bold policies, successors who want to maximize their support should link themselves to the founder and his heroic mission to reactivate followers’ attachments to the movement.

Table 5.4. Average causal mediated effect of movement identification on the relationship between the symbolic cue and candidate support (95 percent confidence intervals shown)

Average Effect	Argentina		Venezuela
	Charisma	Vote Intent	Charisma	Vote Intent
Mediation (Indirect)	.138 (.014, .291)	.201 (.016, .413)	.000 (−.046, .048)	.071 (−.122, .275)
Direct	.206 (−.257, .662)	.123 (−.422, .660)	1.16 (.582, 1.72)	152 (.817, 2.21)
Total	.344 (−.128, .825)	.323 (−.244, .900)	1.16 (.592, 1.73)	1.59 (.870, 2.33)
Proportion Mediated	.361 (−2.05, 3.04)	.490 (−6.51, 9.45)	.000 (.000, .000)	.045 (.030, .081)

5.3 Conclusion

This chapter has provided important evidence that charismatic movements can persist by sustaining their original, personalistic nature rather than transforming into routinized parties. Specifically, new politicians can tap into followers’ latent attachments to the movement to politically reactivate those bonds and garner support as the movement’s new savior. Successors do not achieve this by adopting a strategy of routinization, such as developing a strong, consistent programmatic platform or relying on a well-developed party organization. Rather, new leaders restore the movement to power by embracing a personalistic strategy in which they depict themselves as heroic heirs of the founder and claim their devotion to realizing the founder’s mission of transcendence. To do so, these leaders must first establish their own charisma by promising and fulfilling bold policies that demonstrate their extraordinary capacities; second, they must symbolically link themselves to the founder and display their commitment to reviving his redemptive mission. These tactics increase the political salience of followers’ emotional identification with the movement, which in turn enhance their charismatic perceptions of and electoral support for the successor.

I demonstrate the mechanisms of charismatic attachment reactivation through a survey experiment conducted in Argentina and Venezuela with followers of Peronism and Chavismo, respectively. Similar to the focus groups discussed in Chapter 4, the results illustrate the enduring affective nature of followers’ attachments to the movement. These bonds appeared especially strong in Venezuela, but also revealed themselves in Argentina. The survival of charismatic attachments in the latter case is remarkable, given that Juan Perón died over forty years ago and many observers doubt the resilience of the Peronist identity.²⁰ Moreover, the evidence suggests that new leaders – even ones with whom citizens are unfamiliar, such as a hypothetical presidential candidate – can strategically leverage the founder’s legacy to politically reactivate followers’ charismatic attachments and increase their own personal allure. Successors who combine bold, initially successful policies with symbolic ties to the founder cause followers to express the strongest emotional attachment and elevate the successors’ charismatic appeal.

The results also shed light on the marginal effects of material and symbolic cues. The material cue appears to have important, independent effects on support for the candidate, measured in terms of charismatic perceptions and vote intention. This implies that leaning on the symbolic legacy of a charismatic predecessor is, by itself, insufficient to consolidate power: New leaders seeking to inherit the founder’s mantle must also independently demonstrate their mighty potential. Yet the results also indicate that symbolic ties have a remarkably strong, marginal effect on citizens’ emotional attachments to the movement. Moreover, a causal mediation analysis with the Argentine data indicates the important, indirect effect of the symbolic cue on followers’ support for the candidate. The strength of this cue and its positive impact on candidate support, which operates by increasing the followers’ identification with the movement, underscores the enduring influence of charismatic leaders’ symbolic legacies on voters’ attitudes and behaviors and suggests that leaders seeking to inherit the founders’ power must also tie themselves to those legacies.

Importantly, it is possible that this strategy of charismatic reactivation extends only to the movement’s traditional followers – those who come from the popular sectors (i.e., the lower- and lower-middle classes) and claim an affinity, however faint, with the movement. Moreover, the overall impact of the effects can vary: The symbolic cue may be more powerful at the outset, as indicated in Venezuela, whereas the material cue may prove more essential as time goes on, as suggested in Argentina. Implementation of the strategy, therefore, does not guarantee new leaders’ rise to power. Nevertheless, the importance of charismatic reactivation should not be underestimated. Indeed, followers need not be active, card-carrying members of the movement; they need only have a latent identification with the movement to be influenced by successors’ cues. Popular-sector voters who satisfy this condition constitute a sizeable proportion of the electorate in countries where charismatic movements take root, including Argentina and Venezuela. Thus, politicians have substantial incentives to enact a strategy of charismatic reactivation to enhance their personal appeal. In turn, as demonstrated in the survey experiment, this strategy can increase followers’ emotional attachment to the movement, thereby perpetuating its political relevance over time.

Due to the enduring impact of symbolic ties on followers’ attachments and the resulting influence on political support, leaders in Argentina and Venezuela have continually linked themselves to their charismatic predecessors. In Argentina, for instance, Carlos Menem justified his audacious free-market reforms in the early 1990s by claiming that Perón would have done the same to resolve the crisis (Comas 1993). Years later, when former president Cristina Fernández de Kirchner sought to regain power as a senator in the 2017 elections, she claimed, “If Perón and Evita were alive, who would they vote for? Evita would vote for Cristina, Perón would vote for Taiana [Cristina’s fellow senatorial candidate], and both would vote for Citizen Unity [Cristina’s political movement]” (“Evita votaría a Cristina, Perón votaría a Taiana, y los dos juntos a Unidad Ciudadana” 2017). In Venezuela, despite his government’s dismal performance, President Nicolás Maduro has also heavily relied on his connection to Chávez to sustain his legitimacy, declaring himself the “son of Chávez” and emphasizing his spiritual connection to the founder (e.g., Scharfenberg 2013; @VTVcanal8 2016). The results of my survey experiment suggest that these leaders’ references to the charismatic founders of Peronism and Chavismo are probably strategic attempts to revive popular enthusiasm for the movement and establish a strong foundation for the leaders’ support.

In sum, this chapter has clarified the micro-foundational process through which new leaders reactivate citizens’ emotional attachments to charismatic movements and increase personal appeal. In Chapter 6, I investigate the macro-level conditions that influence leaders’ ability to successfully implement these strategies to win elections and consolidate their own charismatic authority. To do so, I move from the perspective of the movement followers to that of the leaders who seek to revive the movement. By tracing the process through which some leaders succeeded while others failed across three charismatic movements – Peronism, Chavismo, and Fujimorismo in Peru – I indicate the crucial conditions that must be in place for successors to enact the material and symbolic cues described earlier, return the movement to power, and consolidate their own personalistic authority. Given these conditions, Chapter 7 assesses the potential trajectories that charismatic movements can take over the long term and examines the ways in which they threaten liberal democracy and hinder party system development.