Populism and Development: The First Intellectual Debates in Latin America,1961–81

This paper analyzes some of the earliest theoretical discussions about populism in Latin America. It focuses for the most part on Argentina and Brazil, but it connects such debates to developments across the Americas. In the mid-20th century, “populism” and “populist” were terms more commonly used in U.S. universities than in Latin American ones. Although their strict meaning referred to the struggle of farmers in the South and Midwest of the United States in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, they had been used for decades as synonyms for various policies deemed abusive, such as “mobism,” “direct democracy,” or “plebiscitarianism.” Pejorative connotations like these prompted historian Comer Vann Woodward to write an article in 1960 calling on his colleagues for a more balanced reflection. Around the same time, a similar intellectual concern emerged in Latin America, driven by the desire to understand the real alternatives available for the region to overcome its stalled path to development. The central question in these debates was whether Latin America could undergo transformations akin to those experienced by early industrializing Europe or the United States. Would this change come through revolution, as in the case of Cuba, or through a reformist process that did not fundamentally challenge the capitalist system? In either scenario, what form would this political change take? Would it be led by a particular social class, or by a coalition of classes? Drawing on the theoretical contributions of Gino Germani, Torcuato Di Tella, Francisco Weffort, Octavio Ianni, the early work of Ernesto Laclau, and the initial reflections of Juan Carlos Portantiero and Emilio de Ípola, among others, this paper reconstructs the responses these intellectuals provided to these questions, offering a historical account of the early intellectual and political debates that populism has generated across Latin America.