1. POSC 3315 W12-2

2. History Why history matters Path dependence ◦ What it means ◦ How it works ◦ “Off-path” changes ◦ History shapes but doesn’t determine

3. Think of hyperexecutives – Drake ◦ Once established  continued if worked ◦ Applies to other institutions Institutions – what they are ◦ Durable patterns of interactions ◦ Formal ones have legal basis + physical presence + table of organization ◦ Not so with informal ones

4. Want to know ◦ How they started ◦ How they developed ◦ How they keep going ◦ How they change Have a historical trajectory or path

5. Another example Fragment theory Reconquest: What:? ◦ Civil + religious war: Christians v. Muslims ◦ In Spain, 8 th to 15 th C.; ends in 13 th in Portugal ◦ Christians won

7. Significance ◦ Defining issue in Spanish history  Less so in Portugal Affected ◦ Organization of state and society ◦ Outlook: values and beliefs ◦ Role of religion ◦ Thinking about colonizing the Americas

8. Was about capturing land and people ◦ Putting non-Xtians to work for conquerers Military model Administrative procedures ◦ Encomienda and Repartimiento Values ◦ Role of religion ◦ Proper work for Christian gentlemen

9. Set pattern for 250+ yrs of colonial administration ◦ Changed somewhat in mid-18 th C. Portugal was somewhat different ◦ Less a national project: more foreign knights ◦ Ended earlier  Portugal turns to exploration and trade

10. Colonial politics Not like British NA ◦ We had legislatures, representative govt, from outset ◦ Appointed governor + elected legislature  Franchise varied ◦ Local govts

11. Spanish and Portuguese ◦ No representative institutions ◦ Local administrations (cabilidos) weaker than in BNA At independence, 1776, BNA had ◦ Experience with self-govt + autochthonous political class used to governing Ibero-America did not

12. What resulted In NA, USA, eventual civil war, 1861-65 ◦ But also lots of compromises and attempts to find peaceful solutions In NA, CDA, post-1867, keep bumping along, finding compromises In LA: most countries enter extended periods of instability

13. Why? British North America: CDA & USA ◦ When: over a century later (1607) ◦ Different econ, pol & social contexts + different metro institutions ◦ Circumstances: religious freedom/dissent ◦ British politics in 17 th and 18 th centuries v. Spanish or Portuguese in 15 th and 16 th centuries

14. Other examples: Nicaragua General shape of history ◦ As colony ◦ Independence, 1821, to 1858  Nearly constant conflict and civil war. Why? ◦ 1858-1893: Peace, order and good govt in the Switzerland of Central America ◦ 1893-1909: dictatorship ◦ 1909-1934: Civil War, then insurgency;  USMC occupation, 1912-1933

15. 1936-79: Dictatorship; 2 generations of Somozas 1979-90: Revolutionary government, FSLN ◦ Frente Sandinista de Liberación Nacional 1990-2000: conservative elected govts 2000: FSLN-Liberal Pact 2006-present: FSLN again as elected govt ◦ Hegemonic tendencies

16. How can we describe Nica’s historic political path? What should we look for in the future, assuming no more big, off-path changes?

17. Cuba A bit of history ◦ Spanish colony until 1898 ◦ Then US semi-colony due to Platt Amendment, 1902-1933 ◦ Although there were elections since 1901, few were free – 1940 for one ◦ Main form of government dictatorial

18. Dominant theme is Cuban politics anti- imperialism ◦ First Spanish ◦ Then American History, pre-1959  ◦ External domination + dictatorship Reasons for Castro’s revolution

19. Look more at Castro later For now, reflect on Cuba’s political trajectory Colony to semi-colony to foreign dominated to independent but dependent on foreign assistance to now Where is it likely to go?

20. Readings Both ◦ Role of institutions ◦ Ask if personal rule = institutionalized ◦ Role of structural factors ◦ Role of contextual/conjunctural factors ◦ How they use history, especially national histories

21. Drake His objective: Show the democratic side of LA history ◦ Lots of experiments, few successes ◦ But didn’t lag far behind historic dems in experiments (or Central/Southern Europe in practice, pre-WWII) ◦ Faced same problem as many others: reconcile political equality w/soc-ec inequality

22. Sees two broad types ◦ Protected democracy ◦ Popular ◦ Neither wanted political equality + procedures – NA/GB/WE model ◦ Either could be paternalistic or authoritarian ◦ Popular likely personalistic + saw democracy = building solidarity & bringing equality ◦ Not about forms & processes

23. Focus is institutions + civil liberties ◦ Why this matters  Debate over how to define democracy  Procedural; input  Results; output  His partially bridges the two ◦ Historical – tracing trajectories – how we got where we are

24. To note: causes of democracy ◦ The nature of the elites & lack of elite consensus ◦ Subordinate classes: only mentions labour;  In CDA/USA farmers drove early democratization Oligarchic competition ◦ What this means ◦ Why it matters: fairly common pattern

25. Lewis Doesn’t define authoritarianism Currently ◦ Any non-democratic regime – Broad ◦ What this connotes  Govt unaccountable; weak no rule of law  Govt can’t be changed by peaceful means  Govt likely to rely on forceful coercion  Govern the people; not govt by the people

26. PL emphasizes personal rule ◦ Often w/charismatic leader ◦ V. Important in LA; as now in Africa; lost a bit I mid-east His ch. 1 lists some causes of authoritarian rule in Latin America ◦ Overdetermined

27. His list: ◦ undemocratic culture—criollo dominance; Independence: lots of violence, lots of armed men; post-independence breakdown of order: politics changed, not society Caudillos ◦ Highly personalized rule ◦ Not too attentive to party labels/ideas

28. How they ruled ◦ Got stuff to distribute to followers; violent political bosses ◦ No institutionalization. Why? ◦ But you can only steal so much ◦ Eventually need stable govt to get taxes for patronage ◦ But this ends caudillo rule and demands new skills