Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T00:51:09.923Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Coalitions, Voters and Party System Transformation in Post‐authoritarian Chile

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 March 2014

Peter M. Siavelis
Peter M. Siavelis*
Affiliation:
Wake Forest University, Winston‐Salem, North Carolina
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

With The Inauguration Of The Socialist President, Ricardo Lagos, in March 2000 it would appear that the Chilean party system had come full circle since the 1973 coup that unseated the last Socialist President, Salvador Allende. Despite the Chilean military's efforts to eradicate the left during its almost seventeen years in power, a Socialist assumed the presidency only a dozen years after the electoral defeat of the military regime in 1988. In one sense, this success is a testament to the perseverance of the party of Allende, and the party system in general. Nonetheless, the Socialist Party, and indeed the Chilean party system, are quite distinct from the ethos of the Allende years of the early 1970s. At the same time, it is undeniable that there are striking continuities in terms of the number of political parties and patterns of partisan competition. Thus, how should one interpret the extent of transformation and continuity in the Chilean party system?

Type
Original Articles
Information
Government and Opposition , Volume 37 , Issue 1 , January 2002 , pp. 76 - 105
Copyright
Copyright © Government and Opposition Ltd 2002

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 The latter alliance has changed names several times and has also been known as Democracia y Progreso, and Unión por el Progreso.

2 For arguments suggesting qualitative change in the party system, and the potential emergence of a more permanent pattern of bipolarity see Guzmán, Eugenio, ‘Reflexiones sobre el sistema binominal’, Estudios públicos, 51 (Winter 1991), pp. 303–25Google Scholar; Hernán Gutiérrez, ‘Chile 1989: ¿Elecciones fundacionales?’, Documento de trabajo, serie estudios públicos, 3, FLACSO, Santiago (October 1990); and Rabkin, Rhoda, ‘Redemocratization, Electoral Engineering and Party Strategies in Chile: 1989–1995’, Comparative Political Studies, 29:3 (1996), pp. 335–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

3 The system is characterized as such in Manuel Antonio Garretón, The Chilean Political Process, Boston, Unwin Hyman, 1989, p. xvi. For the best overview of the historic importance of parties see Federico Gil, The Political System of Chile, Boston, Houghton Mifflin, 1966, pp. 244–97.

4 Valenzuela, Arturo, The Breakdown of Democratic Regimes: Chile, Baltimore, Johns Hopkins University Press, 1978 Google Scholar; Landsberger, H. and McDaniel, T., ‘Hypermobilization in Chile, 1970–73’, World Politics, 28:4 (07 1976), pp. 502–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

5 Mainwaring, Scott, and Scully, Timothy, Building Democratic Institutions: Party Systems in Latin America, Stanford, Cal., Stanford University Press, 1995 Google Scholar.

6 Valenzuela, Arturo and Valenzuela, J. Samuel, ‘Party Oppositions Under the Authoritarian Regime’, in Valenzuela, J. Samuel and Valenzuela, Arturo (eds), Military Rule in Chile, Baltimore, Johns Hopkins University Press, 1986, pp. 184–229 Google Scholar.

7 On the effects of this reform and the functioning of the binominal system see Siavelis, Peter and Valenzuela, Arturo, ‘Electoral Engineering and Democratic Stability: The Legacy of Authoritarian Rule in Chile’, in Lijphart, Arend and Waisman, Carlos (eds), Institutional Design in New Democracies, Boulder, Colo., Westview Press, 1996, pp. 77–100 Google Scholar.

8 P. Siavelis and A. Valenzuela, ‘Electoral Engineering’, ibid.

9 E. Guzmán, ‘Ref lexiones’, op. cit.; H. Gutiérrez, ‘Chile 1989’, op. cit.; and R. Rabkin, ‘Redemocratization’, op. cit.

10 Siavelis, Peter, ‘Continuity and Change in the Chilean Party System: On the Transformational Effects of Electoral Reform’, Comparative Political Studies, 30:6 (12 1997), pp. 651–74Google Scholar.

11 Valenzuela, J. Samuel and Scully, Timothy, ‘Electoral Choices and the Party System in Chile: Continuities and Changes at the Recovery of Democracy’, Comparative Politics, 29 (07 1997), pp. 511–27Google Scholar.

12 P. Siavelis and A. Valenzuela, ‘Electoral Engineering’, op. cit.

13 Munck, Gerardo and Bosworth, Jeffrey, ‘Patterns of Representation and Competition: Parties and Democracy in Post-Pinochet Chile’, Party Politics, 4:4 (1998), pp. 471–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

14 Scully, Timothy, ‘Reconstituting Party Politics in Chile’, in Mainwaring, Scott and Scully, Timothy (eds), Building Democratic Institutions: Party Systems in Latin America, Stanford, Cal., Stanford University Press, 1995, pp. 100–37Google Scholar.

15 Drake, Paul, ‘The Rise and Fall and Rise of the Socialist Party in Chile’, Annali della Fondazione Giangiacomo Feltrinelli, Fondazione Giangiacomo Feltrinelli, 1996 Google Scholar; Walker, Ignacio, Socialismo y democracia en Chile: Chile y Europa en perspectiva comparada, Santiago, CIEPLAN, 1990 Google Scholar; G. Munck and J. Bosworth, ‘Patterns of Representation’, op. cit.

16 Loveman, Brian, Chile, New York, Oxford University Press, 1979, p. 329 Google Scholar.

17 Silva, Patricio, ‘Social Democracy, Neoliberalism, and Ideological Change in the Chilean Socialist Movement, 1973–1992’, Nordic Journal of Latin America Studies, 23:1–2 (1993), pp. 92–115 Google Scholar.

18 Exceptions include the excellent work by Pollack, Marcelo, The New Right in Chile, Basingstoke, Macmillan, 1999 CrossRefGoogle Scholar and Arriagada, Genaro, ¿Hacia un ‘Big Bang’ del sistema de partidos?, Santiago, Editorial Andes, 1997 Google Scholar.

19 On the 1999–2000 presidential election and the significance of the ‘Lavín factor’ for the right, see Angell, Alan and Pollack, Benny, ‘The Chilean Presidential Election of 1999–2000 and Democratic Consolidation’, Bulletin of Latin American Research, 19:3 (2000), pp. 357–78Google Scholar, and Silva, Patricio, ‘Towards Technocratic Mass Politics in Chile?: The 1999–2000 Elections and the ‘Lavín Phenomenon’, European Review of Latin American and Caribbean Studies, 70:17 (2001), pp. 25–39 Google Scholar.

20 E. Guzmán, ‘Reflexiones’, op. cit.; R. Rabkin, ‘Redemocratization’, op. cit.; P. Siavelis, ‘Continuity and Change’, op. cit.

21 Farren, Gustavo Cuevas, Renovación ideológica en Chile, Santiago, Universidad de Chile, 1993 Google Scholar.

22 J. S. Valenzuela and T. Scully, ‘Electoral Choices’, op. cit.

23 Scully points to the abilty of centre parties to reconstitute themselves as crucial to coalition formation. See Scully, Timothy, Rethinking the Center: Party Politics in Nineteenth and Twentieth Century Chile, Stanford, Cal., Stanford University Press, 1992 Google Scholar. On the ‘difficult combination’ of presidential systems and multipartism, see Mainwaring, Scott, ‘Presidentialism, Multipartism, and Democracy: The Difficult Combination’, Comparative Political Studies, 26:2 (07 1993), pp. 198–228 CrossRefGoogle Scholar. As the problem applies to Chile see Valenzuela, Arturo, ‘Party Politics and the Crisis of Presidentialism in Chile’, in Linz, Juan and Valenzuela, Arturo (eds), The Failure of Presidential Democracy, Vol. 2, Baltimore, Johns Hopkins University Press, 1994 Google Scholar.

24 John Carey, ‘Parties, Coalitions, and the Chilean Congress in the 1990s’, paper presented at the XXI International Meeting of the Latin American Studies Association, Chicago, IL, 24–26 September 1998, p. 27.

25 A. Valenzuela, The Breakdown of Democratic Regimes, op. cit., pp. 7–8.

26 Chile employed the proportional d’Hondt method for elections to the Chamber of Deputies, with districts ranging in magnitude from 2 to 18. Senators were elected in districts with magnitudes of 5. For a description, see F. Gil, The Political System of Chile, op. cit., pp. 206–30.

27 For simulations demonstrating the potentially exclusionary characteristics of the electoral system see Siavelis and Valenzuela, 1996, op. cit.

28 A. Valenzuela, The Breakdown of Democratic Regimes, op. cit., pp. 33–7.

29 Ibid.

30 On the importance of political learning in general see McCoy, Jennifer, Political Learning and Redemocratization in Latin America, Miami, North–South Center Press, 2000 Google Scholar. For a discussion of its relevance to Chile, see Oppenheim, Lois, Politics in Chile, Boulder, Colo., Westview Press, 1993, pp. 205–9Google Scholar, and Tulchin, Joseph and Varas, Augusto, ‘Introduction’, in Tulchin, Joseph and Varas, Augusto (eds), From Dictatorship to Democracy, Boulder, Colo., Lynne Rienner, 1991, p. 4 Google Scholar.

31 See Maira, Luis and Vicario, Guido, Perspectivas de la izquierda latinoamericana, Santiago de Chile, Fondo de Cultura Económico, 1991, pp. 55–84 Google Scholar.

32 A. Valenzuela, The Breakdown of Democratic Regimes, op. cit.; Drake, Paul, Socialism and Populism in Chile: 1932–52, Urbana, University of Illinois Press, 1978 Google Scholar; and F. Gil, The Political System of Chile, op. cit., p. 244.

33 Though the term for Senators is eight years, half of the Senate is renewed every four years. This factor has the potential to deprive presidents of elective majorities in the Senate, even though their parties may sweep Senate elections.

34 Jones, Mark, Electoral Laws and the Survival of Presidential Democracy, Notre Dame, University of Notre Dame Press, 1995 Google Scholar; Shugart, Matthew, ‘The Electoral Cycle and Institutional Sources of Divided Government’, American Political Science Review, 89:2 (1995), pp. 327–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

35 P. Siavelis and A. Valenzuela, ‘Electoral Engineering’, op. cit., p. 95.

36 Arturo Valenzuela, ‘Party Politics and the Failure of Presidentialism in Chile: A Proposal for a Parliamentary form of Government’, paper presented at the conference, ‘Presidential or Parliamentary Democracy: Does it Make a Difference?’, Georgetown University, Washington, DC, 14–16 May 1989, p. 169.

37 P. Siavelis and A. Valenzuela, ‘Electoral Engineering’, op. cit., p. 112; J. S. Valenzuela and T. Scully, ‘Electoral Choices’, op. cit.

38 Timothy Scully, ‘Rethinking the Center’, op. cit., p. 200.

39 Ibid.

40 El Mercurio, 14 December 1997, p. D14.

41 Ibid.

42 Centro de Estudios Públicos, ‘Estudio nacional de opinión pública No. 7’, Documento de trabajo No. 283, Tercera serie, Santiago, Centro de Estudios Públicos (August 1998), p. 45.

43 Participa, ‘Estudio sobre la democracia y participación política’, Informe segunda medición, Santiago, Participa, 1993.

44 P. Siavelis, ‘Continuity and Change’, op. cit.

45 Cavarozzi, Marcelo, ‘Beyond Transitions to Democracy in Latin America’, Journal of Latin American Studies, 24:3 (10 1992), pp. 665–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

46 G. Munck and J. Bosworth, ‘Patterns of Representation’, op. cit.

47 Tironi, Eugenio, La erupción de las masas y el malestar de las elites: Chile en el cambio de siglo, Santiago, Grijalbo, 1999 Google Scholar; Posner, Paul, ‘Popular Representation and Political Dissatisfaction in Chile’s New Democracy’, Journal of Interamerican Studies and World Affairs, 41:1 (Spring 1999), pp. 59–86 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; G. Munck and J. Bosworth, ‘Patterns of Representation’, op. cit.; Agüero, Felipe, Tironi, Eugenio, Valenzuela, Eduardo and Sunkel, Guillermo, ‘Votantes, partidos, e información política: la frágil intermediación en el Chile post-autoritario’, Revista de Ciencia Polítca, 19:2 (1998), pp. 159–93Google Scholar.

48 Siavelis, Peter, The President and Congress in Post-Authoritarian Chile, University Park Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania State University Press, 2000 Google Scholar.