"This is a great contribution to the field of modern Mexican history as well as the history of Latin American populism. Populism in Twentieth Century Mexico offers an intuitive and insightful series of chapters focusing on the plans, programs, successes, and failures of Mexico's two most influential populist presidents."ùJames Alex Garza, author of The Imagined Underworld: Sex, Crime, and Vice in Porfirian Mexico City Mexican presidents Lßzaro Cßrdenas (19341940) and Luis Echeverria (1970-1976) used populist politics in an effort to obtain broad-based popular support for their presidential goals. In spite of differences in administrative plans, both aimed to close political divisions within society, extend government programs to those on the margins of national life, and prevent foreign ideologies and practices from disrupting domestic politics. As different as they were in political style, both relied on appealing to the public through mass media, clothing styles, and music. This volume brings together twelve original essays that explore the concept of populism in twentieth century Mexico. Contributors analyze the presidencies of two of the century's most clearly populist figures, evaluating them against each other and in light of other Latin American and Mexican populist leaders. In order to examine both positive and negative effects of populist political styles, contributors also show how groups as diverse as wild yam pickers in 1970s Oaxaca and intellectuals in 1930s Mexico City had access to and affected government projects. The chapters on the Echeverria presidency are written by contributors at the forefront of emerging scholarship on this topic and demonstrate new approaches to this critical period in Mexican history Through comparisons to Echeverria, contributors also shed new light on the Cardenas presidency, suggesting fresh areas of investigation into the work of Mexico's quintessentially populist leader. Ranging in approach from environmental history to labor history, the essays in this volume present a complex picture of twentieth century populism in Mexico. Amelia M. Kiddle holds an Andrew W. Mellon Postdoctoral Fellowship in Latin American Studies at the Center for the Americas at Wesleyan University. Maria L.O. Mu±oz is an assistant professor of history at Susquehanna University, where she holds a Winifred and Gustave Weber Fellowship in the Humanities.

Contributors to this volume take the long view of populism in Latin America—placing current movements into the context of the past. Venezuela’s Hugo Chávez, Bolivia’s Evo Morales, and Ecuador’s Rafael Correa have brought the subject of Latin American populism once again to the fore of scholarly and policy debate in the region. Latin American Populism in the Twenty-first Century explains the emergence of today’s radical populism and places it in historical context, identifying continuities as well as differences from both the classical populism of the 1930s and 1940s and the neo-populism of the 1990s. Leading Latin American, U.S., and European authors explore the institutional and socioeconomic contexts that give rise to populism and show how disputes over its meaning are closely intertwined with debates over the meaning of democracy. By analyzing the discourse and policies of populist leaders and reviewing their impact in particular countries, these contributors provide a deeper understanding of populism’s democratizing promise as well as the authoritarian tendencies that threaten the foundation of liberal democracy.

This updated edition of Populism in Latin America discusses new developments in populism as a political phenomenon and the emergence of new populist political figures in Mexico, Argentina, and Venezuela in particular. For more than one hundred years—from the beginning of the twentieth to the early twenty-first century—Latin American populists proved amazingly successful at gaining high office, holding on to power, maintaining their followings, and renewing their careers. They raised more campaign money, got more voters to the polls,and held followers’ allegiances far better than traditional politicians. Certainly some populist leaders were corrupt, others manipulated their followers, and still others disgraced themselves. Nevertheless, populist leaders were extraordinarily effective in reaching masses of voters, and some left positive legacies for future generations. Populism in Latin America examines the notion of populism in the political and social culture of Latin American societies as expressed through the populist leaders of several Latin American countries including Argentina, Brazil, Mexico, Chile, Ecuador, Panama, Peru, and Venezuela. This second edition also includes a new preface by Kenneth M. Roberts, professor of comparative and Latin American politics and the Robert S. Harrison Director of the Institute for the Social Sciences at Cornell University. Contributors Jorge Basurto / Michael L. Conniff / Paul W. Drake / Steve Ellner / Joel Horowitz / Kenneth M. Roberts / W. Frank Robinson /Ximena Sosa / Steve Stein / Kurt Weyland

Mexican presidents Lázaro Cárdenas (1934–1940) and Luis Echeverría (1970–1976) used populist politics in an effort to obtain broad-based popular support for their presidential goals. In spite of differences in administrative plans, both aimed to close political divisions within society, extend government programs to those on the margins of national life, and prevent foreign ideologies and practices from disrupting domestic politics. As different as they were in political style, both relied on appealing to the public through mass media, clothing styles, and music. This volume brings together twelve original essays that explore the concept of populism in twentieth century Mexico. Contributors analyze the presidencies of two of the century’s most clearly populist figures, evaluating them against each other and in light of other Latin American and Mexican populist leaders. In order to examine both positive and negative effects of populist political styles, contributors also show how groups as diverse as wild yam pickers in 1970s Oaxaca and intellectuals in 1930s Mexico City had access to and affected government projects. The chapters on the Echeverría presidency are written by contributors at the forefront of emerging scholarship on this topic and demonstrate new approaches to this critical period in Mexican history. Through comparisons to Echeverría, contributors also shed new light on the Cárdenas presidency, suggesting fresh areas of investigation into the work of Mexico’s quintessentially populist leader. Ranging in approach from environmental history to labor history, the essays in this volume present a complex picture of twentieth century populism in Mexico.

Mexico is currently undergoing a crisis of violence and insecurity that poses serious threats to democratic transition and rule of law. This is the first book to put these developments in the context of post-revolutionary state-making in Mexico and to show that violence in Mexico is not the result of state failure, but of state-making. While most accounts of politics and the state in recent decades have emphasized processes of transition, institutional conflict resolution, and neo-liberal reform, this volume lays out the increasingly important role of violence and coercion by a range of state and non-state armed actors. Moreover, by going beyond the immediate concerns of contemporary Mexico, this volume pushes us to rethink longterm processes of state-making and recast influential interpretations of the so-called golden years of PRI rule. Violence, Coercion, and State-Making in Twentieth-Century Mexico demonstrates that received wisdom has long prevented the concerted and systematic study of violence and coercion in state-making, not only during the last decades, but throughout the post-revolutionary period. The Mexican state was built much more on violence and coercion than has been acknowledged—until now.

The general perception of modern Latin American political institutions emphasizes a continuing and random process of disorder and crisis, continually out of step with other regions in their progress toward democracy and prosperity. In History of Political Parties in Twentieth-Century Latin America, Torcuato S. Di Tella demonstrates that this common view lacks context and comparative nuance, and is deeply misleading. Looking behind the scenes of modern Latin American history, he discerns its broad patterns through close analysis of actual events and comparative sociological perspectives that explain the apparent chaos of the past and point toward the more democratic polity now developing. Di Tella argues that although Latin America has peculiarities of its own, they must be understood in their contrasts--and similarities--with both the developed centers and undeveloped peripheries of the world. Latin American societies have been prone to mass rebellions from very early on, more so than in other regions of the world. He analyzes, as well, such significant exceptions to this pattern as Chile, Colombia, and, to a large extent, Brazil. Turning to the other side of the social spectrum, he shows how the underpriviledged classes have tended to support strongman populist movements, which have the double character of being aggressive toward the established order, but at the same time repressive of public liberties and of more radical groups. Di Tella provides here a necessary examination of the concept of populism and divides it into several variants. Populism, he maintains, is by no means disappearing, but its variants are instead undergoing important changes with significant bearing on the region's near-term future. History of Political Parties in Twentieth-Century Latin America is rich in historical description, but also in its broad review of social structures and of the strengths and weaknesses of political institutions. Choice commented that "this heavily documented volume with an extensive bibliography would prove valuable to researchers and advanced students of Latin America."

This work brings together a new generation of drug historians and new historical sources to uncover the history of the drug trade and its regulations. While the US and Mexican governments developed anti-drug discourses and policies, which criminalized both high-profile traffickers and small-time addicts, these authorities also employed the criminals and cash connected to the drug trade to pursue more pressing political concerns. The politics, socioeconomic relations, and criminal justice system of modern Mexico has been shaped by standing public and covert state policies as well as by the interaction of subnational trajectories of drug production and trafficking. The essays in this study explore this complicated narrative and provide insight into Mexico's history and the wider contemporary global drug trade.