American Caudillo: the Rise of Strongmen Politics in the United States and Latin America
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
American Caudillo: The Rise of Strongmen Politics in the United States and Latin America Dinorah Azpuru, PhD, Wichita State University Mary Fran T. Malone, PhD, University of New Hampshire Orlando J. Pérez, PhD, Millersville University Abstract Why do citizens vote for leaders who disregard democratic norms? The 2016 U.S. election has propelled this question to the forefront of political discussions not just in academic circles, but among journalists and practitioners as well. To answer this question, we examine support for populist “strongmen” in the United States and the ALBA countries of Latin America. Relying upon the Latin American Public Opinion Project's (LAPOP) AmericasBarometer and the American National Election Study (ANES), we identify similar survey questions to predict votes for caudillos in very different national contexts. To understand why voters support strongmen and their authoritarian values, we analyze the impact of perception of threat, authoritarian values, alienation from the political system, nationalism, populism, and intolerance. When we compare the results across our ALBA and U.S. models, we find two variables tend to explain support for strongmen: support for a strong leader who will bend the rules/limit the voice of the opposition and ideology. Paper prepared for delivery at the 2017 conference of the Latin American Political Science Association, ALACIP, Montevideo, Uruguay. 1 American Caudillo: The Rise of Strongmen Politics in the United States and Latin America The 2016 American presidential elections were historic. These elections marked the first time a major political party nominated a woman as well as the rise of an outsider, real estate magnate and TV reality show host Donald J. Trump. Mr. Trump’s appeal to law and order, nationalism, protectionism, and populist politics parallels that of multiple “strongmen” in Latin America.1 As Javier Corrales (2016) notes, “For me, as a long-time observer of Latin American politics, what’s most unnerving about Trump’s rise is just how familiar it feels.” Many scholars of Latin American politics echoed Corrales’ observation, citing the many similarities between the rise of Donald Trump and that of numerous Latin American caudillos, such as Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez and Ecuador’s Rafael Correa. These strongmen typically disparage political institutions, political insiders, and oftentimes different racial and ethnic groups. They mobilize disenchanted voters who feel “left behind,” promising to act decisively to “fix the country.” Why do voters support such strongmen? We answer this question by identifying the factors that explain support for strongmen in Latin America and the United States. For this cross-national study, we rely upon the 2016 post-election American National Elections Survey (ANES) survey2 and data from the AmericasBarometer, a survey conducted by the Latin American Public Opinion (LAPOP) from Vanderbilt University.3 These data sources allow us to compare the determinants of voting for Trump and the elected leaders of ALBA. ALBA, formally the Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of Our America, is an alliance centered on the leftist leaders of Bolivia, Ecuador, Nicaragua, and Venezuela – all of whom have exhibited caudillo characteristics.4 1 “Strongman” is used in a non-gendered meaning since women candidates could also follow similar political strategies. In fact, in Latin America the former Argentinian president Cristina Fernández de Kirchner was identified with populist, authoritarian and “strongmen” politics. 2 The American National Elections Survey (ANES) has been conducted since 1948 by the University of Michigan and Stanford University as an effort to measure electoral attitudes and behavior among United States voters. The 2016 study “features a dual-mode design with both traditional face-to-face interviewing (n=1,181) and surveys conducted on the Internet (n=3,090), and a total sample size of 4,271. The target population for the face-to-face mode was 222.6 million U.S. citizens age 18 or older living in the 48 contiguous states of the USA or the District of Columbia, and the target population for the Internet mode was 224.1 million U.S. citizens age 18 or older living in the 50 US states or the District of Columbia. In both modes, the sampling frame was lists of residential addresses where mail is delivered, and to be eligible to participate, a respondent had to reside at the sampled address and be a U.S. citizen age 18 or older at the time of recruitment” (User’s Guide and Codebook for the ANES 2016 Time Series Study, http://www.electionstudies.org/studypages/anes_timeseries_2016/anes_timeseries_2016_userguidecodebook.pdf) 3 For over three decades, LAPOP has been the leading organization collecting public opinion data in Latin America, and its surveys include several questions on voting behavior, ideology, attitudes towards government, and political values, among others. The authors would like to thank LAPOP and its major supporters (the United States Agency for International Development, the Inter-American Development Bank, and Vanderbilt University) for making the data available. 4 In this paper, the Latin American portion of the analysis focuses on voting behavior in the four ALBA countries; however, in the future our analysis will extend to include leaders outside ALBA who have also exhibited caudillo tendencies, and position themselves on different points throughout the ideological spectrum. 2 Using data from Latin America allows for a most-different system design, in which we demonstrate that the observed correlation between independent and dependent variables holds regardless of the variation in contextual settings. Culturally, historically, economically, politically, and socially, Latin America and the United States could not be more different, yet the rise of Donald Trump might represent the Latin Americanization of American politics in which socio-demographic, economic, and geopolitical changes have culminated in the support for a political strongman, giving rise to an American caudillo. Furthermore, since the ALBA leaders are noted for their leftist leanings, and Trump’s appeal is primarily to the ideological right, our analysis allows us to identify the factors that predict votes for strongmen across the ideological spectrum. In the lead up and aftermath of the 2016 U.S. presidential elections, several scholars have sought to explain public support for Trump. Matthew MacWilliams (2016) found that authoritarianism and fear of terrorism were the only two statistically significant correlates of support for Trump and that increased threat perception enhanced support for authoritarian measures. Marc Hetherington and Jonathan Weiler (2009) found that increasing polarization among the American electorate around issues such as race, gay marriage, immigration, and the use of force were primarily correlated to authoritarian values. Hetherington and Weiler argue that the Republican Party has increasingly attracted those with authoritarian values by focusing on traditional cultural values and on law and order issues. Socio-demographic changes (such as immigration, growth in minority populations, women moving away from traditional roles, homosexual rights, and economic changes produced by globalization) increased perceptions of threat and triggered authoritarian tendencies. Evidence from Latin America suggests that strongmen are able to capitalize on these perceptions of threat when traditional political parties undergo a crisis of representation. When established political parties weaken, strongmen succeed by organizing outside, and in opposition to, the traditional political structures. Their ability to organize is facilitated by their “mass communication” skills. Strongmen use rallies, television, and, more recently, social media to link the leader with the masses. They aim to use mass communication to transcend the traditional media and create unmediated links between the leader and the population (Boas 2005). Social media outlets like Twitter are ideal for this purpose, as they allow a strongman to communicate directly to the mass public without the filter of the media. Traditional media such as radio and television also play an important role. Strongmen use these communication strategies to build alternative means of social mobilization through new political parties and social movements, or the development of plebiscitarian mechanisms. These mechanisms have an added advantage in that they bypass the institutional checks of a liberal democracy and marginalize the traditional political opposition. Furthermore, strongmen tend to wrap themselves in the national flag. They attempt to appropriate national symbols and myths in order to garner support and advance their agenda. Oftentimes this approach involves the creation of national enemies (foreign and/or domestic) who serve as scapegoats for national problems. Strongmen often use these scapegoats to rally popular support and also use this combination of national symbols and common enemies to divert attention from domestic problems. Finally, strongmen base a significant portion of their legitimacy on 3 charisma and personal appeal. They seek to establish an “organic” relationship between the leader and the led. The leader is the “interpreter” of the will of the people. Thus, only the leader can understand the people’s wishes or needs. In sum, recent U.S. research suggests a link between support for Trump and authoritarian values, and the Latin American literature identifies