Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T05:03:27.707Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Executive Assaults and the Social Foundations of Democracy in Ecuador

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2018

William T. Barndt
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Although Ecuadorian presidents tolerate most opposition voices most of the time, they routinely try to restrict the basic political liberties of particular critics. In doing so, they initiate executive assaults. Why do some of these executive assaults succeed while others fail? This article analyzes patterns of support for and opposition to publicly contested assaults in Ecuador between 1979 and 2004. Using a combination of statistical tests and a case study, it develops an argument based on the relative power of different types of organizations and associations to influence the outcomes of assault conflicts. The analysis demonstrates that executive assaults fail only when neither the state security forces nor the business sector supports them. In this situation, particular business organizations are able to force presidents to back down. The analysis provides new insights into the social foundations of democratic practice in Ecuador, and Latin America more broadly.

Type
Research Article
Information
Latin American Politics and Society , Volume 52 , Issue 1 , Spring 2010 , pp. 121 - 154
Copyright
Copyright © University of Miami 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ames, Barry. 1987. Political Survival: Politicians and Public Policy in Latin America. Berkeley : University of California Press.Google Scholar
Bartell, Ernest, and Payne, Leigh A., eds. 1995. Business and Democracy in Latin America. Pittsburgh : University of Pittsburgh Press.Google Scholar
Braumoeller, Bear, and Goertz, Gary. 2000. The Methodology of Necessary Conditions. American Journal of Political Science 44: 844–58.Google Scholar
Bruneau, Thomas C. 2006. Ecuador: the Continuing Challenge of Democratic Consolidation and Civil-Military Relations. Strategic Insights 5, 2. <http://www.nps.edu/Academics/centers/ccc/publications/OnlineJournal/2006/Feb/bruneauFeb06.html>.Google Scholar
Burbano Lara, Felipe, and Rowlands García, Michael. 1998. Pugna de poderes: presidencialismo y partidos en el Ecuador. Quito : CORDES-Gobernabilidad.Google Scholar
Bustamante, Fernando. 1999. Las FF.AA. ecuatorianas y la coyuntura político-social de fin de siglo. In Control civil y fuerzas armadas en las nuevas democracias latinoamericanas, ed. Diamant, Rut. Buenos Aires : Universidad Torcuato di Tella/Grupo Editorial Latinoamericano. 339–62.Google Scholar
Cameron, Maxwell A. 1997. Political Origins of Regime Change in Peru: The Eighteenth Brumaire of Alberto Fujimori. In The Peruvian Labyrinth: Polity, Society, Economy, ed. Cameron, and Mauceri, Philip. University Park : Penn State University Press. 37–69.Google Scholar
Clark, Kim A., and Becker, Marc. 2007. Highland Indians and the State in Modern Ecuador. Pittsburgh : University of Pittsburgh Press.Google Scholar
Collier, Ruth Berins. 1999. Paths Toward Democracy: The Working Class and Elites in Western Europe and South America. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
El Comercio (Quito). 2003a. El Jefe de Estado volvió a criticar a la prensa. September 6.Google Scholar
El Comercio (Quito). 2003b. No se hará una ley anti calumnia. September 9.Google Scholar
El Comercio (Quito). 2003c. Lucio Gutiérrez envió una explicación a Aedep. September 12.Google Scholar
El Comercio (Quito). 2003d. Transparencia, arma contra la corrupción. October 12.Google Scholar
Conaghan, Catherine M. 1988. Restructuring Domination: Industrialists and the State in Ecuador. Pittsburgh : University of Pittsburgh Press.Google Scholar
Conaghan, Catherine M. 1995. Politicians Against Parties: Discord and Disconnection in Ecuador's Party System. In Building Democratic Institutions: Party Systems in Latin America, ed. Mainwaring, Scott and Scully, Timothy R.. Stanford : Stanford University Press. 434–58.Google Scholar
Conaghan, Catherine M. 2008. Ecuador: Correa's Plebiscitary Presidency. Journal of Democracy 19, 2: 46–60.Google Scholar
Conaghan, Catherine M., and Malloy, James M.. 1994. Unsettling Statecraft: Democracy and Neoliberalism in the Central Andes. Pittsburgh : University of Pittsburgh Press.Google Scholar
Coppedge, Michael. 1994. Strong Parties and Lame Ducks: Presidential Partyarchy and Factionalism in Venezuela. Stanford : Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Dahl, Robert A. 1972. Polyarchy: Participation and Opposition. New Haven : Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Director. 2006. Manager of Ecuadorian media outlet. Author interview. Quito, March.Google Scholar
Economist Intelligence Unit. 2003. Country Report: Ecuador. London : Economist Intelligence Unit.Google Scholar
Fitch, J. Samuel. 1998. The Armed Forces and Democracy in Latin America. Baltimore : Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Goertz, Gary. 2006. Assessing the Trivialness, Relevance, and Relative Importance of Necessary or Sufficient Conditions in Social Science. Studies in Comparative International Develoment. 41, 2: 88–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goertz, Gary, and Mahoney, James. 2005. Two-Level Theories and Fuzzy-Set Analysis. Sociological Methods Research 33, 4: 497–538.Google Scholar
Hidrobo, Jorge. 1992. Power and Industrialization in Ecuador. Boulder : Westview Press.Google Scholar
Keck, Margaret E., and Sikkink, Kathryn. 1998. Activists Beyond Borders: Advocacy Networks in International Politics. Ithaca : Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Latin American Weekly Report. 2007a. Ecuador: Politics. June 14, 4.Google Scholar
Latin American Weekly Report. 2007b. Correa Readies for “Mother of All Battles” in Ecuador. June 21, 1–2.Google Scholar
Latin American Weekly Report. 2007c. Ecuador: Politics. August 16, 4.Google Scholar
Lawson, Chappell H. 2002. Building the Fourth Estate: Democratization and the Rise of a Free Press in Mexico. Berkeley : University of California Press.Google Scholar
Lucero, Antonio José. 2008. Struggles of Voice: The Politics of Indigenous Representation in the Andes. Pittsburgh : University of Pittsburgh Press.Google Scholar
Mahoney, James. 2000. Strategies of Causal Inference in Small-N Analysis. Sociological Methods and Research 28, 4 (May): 387–424.Google Scholar
Mahoney, James, and Snyder, Richard. 1999. Rethinking Agency and Structure in the Study of Regime Change. Studies in Comparative International Development 34, 2 (Summer): 3–32.Google Scholar
Mantilla Anderson, Jaime. 2007. Director, Hoy. Author interview. Quito, August 13.Google Scholar
Marx, Karl. 1852 (2004). The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte. New York : International Publishers.Google Scholar
McAdam, Doug, McCarthy, John D., and Zald, Mayer N.. 1996. Introduction: Opportunities, Mobilizing Structures, and Framing Processes—Toward a Synthetic, Comparative Perspective on Social Movements. In Comparative Perspectives on Social Movements, ed. McAdam, McCarthy, and Zald, . New York : Cambridge University Press. 1–40.Google Scholar
O'Donnell, Guillermo. 1994. Delegative Democracy. Journal of Democracy 5, 1 (January): 55–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Payne, Leigh A. 1994. Brazilian Industrialists and Democratic Change. Baltimore : Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Pion-Berlin, David, ed. 2000. Civil-Military Relations in Latin America: New Analytical Perspectives. Chapel Hill : University of North Carolina Press.Google Scholar
Presidencia de la República. 2003. Presidente Gutiérrez envió carta a la Aedep: Gobierno defiende la libertad de expresión. Communiqué. September 11.Google Scholar
Ragin, Charles C. 2000. Fuzzy-Set Social Science. Chicago : University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Rueschemeyer, Dietrich, Huber Stephens, Evelyne, and Stephens, John D.. 1992. Capitalist Development and Democracy. Chicago : University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Sánchez Parga, José. 1998. La pugna de poderes: análisis crítico del sistema político ecuatoriano. Quito : Ediciones Abya-Yala.Google Scholar
Schedler, Andreas, Plattner, Marc F., and Diamond, Larry. The Self-Restraining State: Power and Accountability in New Democracies. Boulder : Lynne Rienner.Google Scholar
Schneider, Ben Ross. 2004. Business Politics and the State in Twentieth-Century Latin America. New York : Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Schneider, Ben Ross. 2008. Economic Liberalization and Corporate Governance: the Resilience of Business Groups in Latin America. Comparative Politics 40, 4: 379–98.Google Scholar
Seawright, Jason. 2002. Testing for Necessary and/or Sufficient Causation: Which Cases Are Relevant Political Analysis 10, 2: 178–93.Google Scholar
Smulovitz, Catalina, and Peruzzotti, Enrique. 2000. Societal Accountability in Latin America. Journal of Democracy 11, 4 (October): 147–58.Google Scholar
Stepan, Alfred. 2001. Arguing Comparative Politics. Oxford : Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Tarrow, Sidney. 1989. Democracy and Disorder: Protest and Politics in Italy, 1965–1975. Oxford : Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
El Universo (Guayaquil). 2003a. Gutiérrez no identifica a medios que lo presionan. July 10, A1.Google Scholar
El Universo (Guayaquil). 2003b. Cevallos: Presidente aplicará actual ley de libertad de expresión. September 11, 6A.Google Scholar
El Universo (Guayaquil). 2003c. El presidente dijo que luchará contra la injuria. September 12, 5A.Google Scholar
Valverde, Pedro. 2003. Executive Director, Aedep. Author interview. Guayaquil, October 23.Google Scholar
Van Cott, Donna Lee. 2005. From Movements to Parties in Latin America: The Evolution of Ethnic Politics. New York : Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Yashar, Deborah J. 2005. Contesting Citizenship: Indigenous Movements and the State in Latin America. New York : Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar