Prior to analyzing military regimes in Latin America and the causes of their emergence, it is of crucial importance to understand the concept of dictatorship, because, it has many forms, and can be interpreted from various perspectives. Traditionally, it is defined as the state system, in which a single person exercises complete authority. The main peculiarity of military dictatorship is that power belongs to military commanders (or commanders). However, it should not be confused with stratocracy, which is also a form of the military regime, but the society and legislation support such form of government (Masterson, 1991).
The fact that the twentieth century has produced so many military dictatorships in Latin America can be ascribed to many reasons such as historical, social, and even cultural. First, it should be taken into consideration, that the vast majority of Latin American countries are relatively young; they achieved independence from colonial empires such as Spain and Portugal only in the nineteenth century, which means that the political system has not yet evolved. Moreover, even those countries, which now deem themselves as “highly democratic” (for instance, France, Spain, Germany, or Italy), have also passed through this stage in their development. Probably, it is a natural course of events, and every society has to overcome it.
Paul Lewis in his book “Authoritarian Regimes in Latin America” argues that autocratic rules in this region are the result of the so-called “undemocratic culture” (Lewis, 2005, p 7). As it has been mentioned earlier, have long been under the rule of Spain and Portugal, which were at that moment absolute monarchies, the king (or dictator as it turned later) wielded unrestricted power. Therefore, such a form of government is deep-rooted in Latin America. Additionally, Paul Lewis states, the independence movement in these countries was destructive and often spread havoc and anarchy (Lewis, 2005). In such cases, any person, who possesses strength, may seize power, because anarchy, itself often leads to autocracy or dictatorship.
Discussing such phenomenon as dictatorship in Latin American countries, we cannot disregard such aspects as the attitude of the society towards this issue. The main problem is that the conservative part of the population in such countries as Cuba, Chile, or Bolivia believes that people require iron discipline in order to make progress and this discipline can be brought only by militaries. The great shift in public opinion towards democracy has already been made; however, remnants of such political philosophy are still noticeable (Masterson, 1991).
Autocratic or dictatorship regimes presuppose the existence of junta, or military officers, who assume political power in the country, especially after coup d’état. As a rule, this group is headed by a political or military leader, who is usually called caudillo (Lewis, 2005). If we trace the historic development of military regimes in Latin America, we will see that the concept of caudillo or political leader underwent considerable change.
Among famous Latin American caudillos of the nineteenth century, we can single out such prominent and charismatic personalities as José Gervasio Artigas, Juan Manuel de Rosas, Antonio López, and many others. They became political leaders mostly due to their reputation, which they acquired during the wars for independence, and charisma, or ability to influence other people. Therefore, their rule was supported by the then society (Keen, 2005).
In sharp contrast with them, some modern Latin American leaders as José Efraín Ríos Montt, Gustavo Rojas Pinilla, or Augusto Pinochet gave preference to the use of military force, threats and oppression. In fact, it is no longer possible to call them caudillos, because, the methods they employed were not compatible with the traditional meaning of the word “caudillo”.
Thus, we can arrive at the conclusion that the roots of Latin American militarism lie deep in history, especially, the colonial rule of Spain and Portugal. Furthermore, it is quite possible to say that dictatorships regimes have altered since the nineteenth century; in particular, it concerns methods of persuasion, chosen by political leaders.
References
Benjamin Keen, Keith Haynes (2005) A History of Latin America. Houghton Mifflin Co.
Daniel M. Masterson (1991). Militarism and politics in Latin America. Greenwood Publishing Group.
Paul H. Lewis (2005). Authoritarian Regimes in Latin America: Dictators, Despots, and Tyrants. Rowman & Littlefield.