Right-Wing Think Tank Networks in Latin America: The Mexican Connection

2018 ◽  
Vol 17 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 89-102
Author(s):  
Julián Castro Rea

Abstract Right-wing think tanks and their transnational networks in Latin America are barely known, and scarcely documented.1 Close scholarly investigation into their activities, structure, connections, impacts, and ideology is non-existent. This article aims at contributing to fill this gap, by adding insights into the most prominent organizations and networks based in Mexico. This preliminary information is useful to gauge more accurately the scope of the organizations and networks, and their ability to influence policy and the political process.

Organization ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 27 (3) ◽  
pp. 394-404 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amon Barros ◽  
Sergio Wanderley

We advocate for the relevance of taking Brazilian past experience and theorization of populism into account to understand present-day challenges. We depart from Weffort’s conceptualization of populism to discuss the role of businesspeople movements in supporting and taking control of the political agenda through think tanks. According to Weffort, populism is built over precarious alliances that tend to favor policy or politics in different moments. During times of divergence among political elites, a populist leader emerges as a mediator in orchestrating an unstable hegemony among asymmetric classes. At the same time, the classes included in the populist alliance give legitimacy to the populist leader; they hinder his capacity of imposing decisions. However, treason of the weakest within the alliance is certain. We suggest that the political role played by the think tank IPES, in 1960s Brazil, in reframing middle-class demands is akin to contemporary populist events in Brazil—represented by the election of Jair Bolsonaro—and in the Anglo-Saxon world. Trumpism and Brexit are examples of a still-powerful free-market ideology project wrapped up under a populist discourse (re)framed with the support of businessmen and think tanks. A corporate takeover of government and the imposition of a free-market agenda are certain, as it is the treason of the weakest in the populist coalition. CMS academics should engage with the demands that give birth to populist movements as a way to dispute the neoliberal hegemony and anti-democratic populist solutions.


Author(s):  
Paulo Buss ◽  
Sebastián Tobar

The construction of the concepts of diplomacy and health diplomacy must consider their conceptions and practices, at both the global and regional levels. Health diplomacy is vitally important in a global context, where health problems cross national borders and more new stakeholders appear every day, both within and outside the health sector. On the other hand, regional integration processes provide excellent opportunities for collective actions and solutions to many of the health challenges at the global level. In the current global context, the best conditions for dealing with many health challenges are found at the global level, but the regional and subregional spheres also play essential roles. The region of Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC) consists of 26 countries or territories that occupy a territory of 7,412,000 square miles—almost 13% of the Earth’s land surface area; it extends from Mexico to Patagonia, where about 621 million people live (as of 2015), distributed among different ethnic groups. Geographically, it is divided into Mexico and Central America, the Caribbean, and South America, but it presents subregions with populations and cultures that are a little more homogenous, like the subregions of the Andes and the English Caribbean. By its characteristics, LAC has acquired increasing global political and economic importance. In the 1960s, integration processes began in the region, including the creation of the Union of South American Nations (UNASUR), Mercosur, the Andean Community, the Caribbean Community (CARICOM), the Central American System, the Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of Our America (ALBA), the Amazon Cooperation Treaty Organization (ACTO), the Sistema Económico Latinoamericano y del Caribe (SELA), the Asociación Latinoamericana de Integración (ALADI), and finally, since 2010, the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (Comunidad de Estados Latinoamericanos y Caribeños, or CELAC), which is the most comprehensive integrative organization. While originally a mechanism for political and economic integration, health is now an important component of all the abovementioned integration processes, with growing social, political, and economic importance in each country and in the region, currently integrating the most important regional and global negotiations. Joint protection against endemic diseases and epidemics, as well as noncommunicable diseases, coordination of border health care, joint action on the international scene (particularly in multilateral organizations such as the United Nations and its main agencies), and the sectoral economic importance of health are among the main situations and initiatives related to health diplomacy in these integration processes. The effectiveness of integration actions—and health within those actions—varies according to the political orientations of the national governments in each conjuncture, amplifying or reducing the spectrum of activities performed. The complexity of both the present and future of this rich political process of regional health diplomacy is also very important for global health governance (GHG).


2011 ◽  
Vol 55 (3) ◽  
pp. 340-365 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fabiana Machado ◽  
Carlos Scartascini ◽  
Mariano Tommasi

In this article, the authors argue that where institutions are strong, actors are more likely to participate in the political process through institutionalized arenas, while where they are weak, protests and other unconventional means of participation become more appealing. The authors explore this relationship empirically by combining country-level measures of institutional strength with individual-level information on protest participation in seventeen Latin American countries. The authors find evidence that weaker political institutions are associated with a higher propensity to use alternative means for expressing preferences, that is, to protest.


2002 ◽  
Vol 34 (3) ◽  
pp. 687-715 ◽  
Author(s):  
CARMELO MESA-LAGO ◽  
KATHARINA MÜLLER

Latin America has been a world pioneer of neoliberal, structural reform of social security pensions (‘privatisation’). This article focuses on the diverse political economy circumstances that enabled such reform, analysing why policy makers have chosen such a costly strategy and how they have managed to implement it. First, in nine countries with diverse regimes (authoritarian and democratic) it examines the internal political process that led to the adoption of reform. There tends to be an inverse relationship between the degree of democratisation and that of privatisation, but the political regime alone cannot fully explain the reform outcomes in all cases. To expand the search for explanatory variables, other key factors that might have influenced the reform design are studied, among them relevant political actors (driving and opposing forces), existing institutional arrangements, legal constraints, internal and external economics and policy legacy.


2020 ◽  
pp. 149-164
Author(s):  
Marcelo Lopes de Souza

This chapter explores the relationship between populism and environmental justice in Latin America. It was not only within the framework of overtly dictatorial regimes during the 20th century that the struggles for social justice and human rights in Latin America faced severe obstacles and suffered setbacks. They have also been badly hampered by populism — both right-wing neo-populism with its component of intolerance and conservatism, and left-wing populism, which, by means of co-opting civil society, helps demobilise it and slow down or limit processes of awareness and radicalisation of democracy. The struggles for environmental justice are a crucial example of this. The chapter then addresses the main aspects of how left-wing neo-populism has undermined environmental justice in Latin America, and particularly in Brazil. It focuses more closely on the political and ideological consequences of left-wing populism's contradictions and failure in terms of a deepening of social tensions and struggles. The chapter argues that left-wing neo-populism has been ultimately part of the problem rather than of the solution.


2010 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 333-354
Author(s):  
DINGPING GUO

AbstractThe quantity and quality of Japanese political studies in China are influenced by political developments in China and Japan, Sino-Japanese relations, and academic development of political science. After the collapse of Japan's bubble economy and the end of the LDP's long rule in the early 1990s, many Chinese scholars diverted their attention from economic issues and took more interest in Japanese political studies. Political issues such as the resurgence of nationalism, the rise of right-wing forces, the end of the ‘1955 system’, the political origin of long and heavy recessions, the ‘normal state’, national strategy, and foreign policies have been discussed and debated. New approaches and perspectives such as the political pluralist approach, the new institutional approach, the ecological approach and the political process approach have been used. It is imperative to overcome the institutional, political, and financial problems in order to improve the state and raise the quality of Japanese political studies in China.


Politik ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sigurd Allern ◽  
Ester Pollack

The topic of this paper is the media visibility of Swedish advocacy think tanks, as measured by references to these think tanks in leading Swedish print newspapers. Advocacy think tanks are, in contrast with more research-oriented think tanks, characterised by their outspoken ideological and political agenda. In public debates, they often have a partisan role. Four research questions will be answered: How often are these advocacy think tanks referred to in the news? How important are they as commentators and opinion-makers? How are they presented as sources in the news? What is the relative strength of market-liberal and right-wing think tanks versus red/green think tanks, in terms of media representation and agenda-setting?The selection criteria, type of newspapers, and time period used in this study of Swedish advocacy think tanks have been coordinated with parallel, national think tank studies by media researchers in Denmark, Norway, and Finland. Several changes in the think tank landscape took place after the turn of the millennium, which motivated us to select two full newspaper years, 2006 and 2013, to better cover these developments. To gain a deeper understanding of the think tanks’ backgrounds, their cooperation with other think tanks, and their media strategies, we conducted background interviews with representatives from four advocacy think tanks. We met with Karin Svanborg-Sjövall, CEO of Timbro; Boa Ruthström, CEO of Arena Idé, and Maja Dahl, communication manager of Arena Idé; Mattias Goldmann, CEO of Fores; and Daniel Suhonen, the leader of Katalys.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document