Hostname: page-component-77f85d65b8-grvzd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-04-18T12:21:25.847Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The Social Bases of Political Parties in Argentina, 1912–2003

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 September 2022

Noam Lupu
Affiliation:
Princeton University
Susan C. Stokes
Affiliation:
Yale University
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the 'Save PDF' action button.

To what extent has the Argentine party system been polarized along class lines? The political historiography gives mixed and contradictory answers to this question. We explore the social bases of Argentina's political parties using an original database, the most comprehensive database of Argentine elections yet assembled, and new methods of ecological inference that yield more reliable results than previous analyses. We identify two distinct party systems, one in place between 1912 and 1940, the other emerging after 1946. The first party system was not consistently class based, but the second was, with the Radical Party representing the middle classes and the Peronists, workers and the poor. Still, there were important exceptions. Lower-class support for the Peronists, as proxied by literacy rates, declined during Perón's exile, which implies that the party had trouble mobilizing lower-class illiterate voters. Since the return to democracy in 1983, class polarization has again found some expression in the party system.

Resumo

Resumo

¿Cuán polarizado por clase socioeconómica ha sido el sistema partidario en la Argentina? La historiografía política nos ofrece respuestas variadas y contradictorias a esta pregunta. En este trabajo exploramos las bases sociales de los partidos políticos argentinos usando una base de datos original, la más completa de elecciones argentinas que se haya construido. Además aplicamos métodos novedosos de inferencia ecológica que producen resultados más confiables que estudios anteriores. Identificamos dos sistemas partidarios distintos, uno existente entre 1912 y 1940, y el otro surgiendo después del 1946. El primer sistema partidario no fue consistentemente basado en las clases sociales, pero el segundo sí lo fue, con el partido radical representando las clases medias y el peronista las clases trabajadoras y pobres. Sin embargo, hubo excepciones. El apoyo que la clase baja dio al peronismo, medido con tazas de alfabetismo como proxy, declinó durante el exilio de Juan Perón, sugiriendo que el partido no pudo movilizar votantes analfabetos pobres. Desde la transición democrática en el 1983, la polarización económica ha vuelto a ser expresada en el sistema partidario.

Information

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © 2009 by the Latin American Studies Association

A correction has been issued for this article: