Ideologues And Ideologies In Latin America

The chapters in this volume provide a varied yet consistent analysis of the ways in which ideologies have been used, misused, or abandoned in Latin America in the twentieth century. The volume offers scholars and students a challenging collection of interpretations of and explanations for the ways in which ideologues and ideologies have played a crucial role in the political development of the continent. And, while illuminating key reasons for the rise and fall of specific ideologies and their repeated betrayal throughout the century—from anarchism to communism, to socialism, to Peronism, to neoliberalism—the volume indicates how much there is still left to learn about the importance of ideological discourse in the mind and polity of Latin America. With chapters examining Mexico, Chile, Cuba, Paraguay, and Argentina, this work will be of interest to all Latin Americanists.

The Cambridge History of Latin America is a large scale, collaborative, multi-volume history of Latin America during the five centuries from the first contacts between Europeans and the native peoples of the Americas in the late fifteenth and early sixteenth centuries to the present. Ideas and Ideologies in Twentieth-Century Latin America brings together chapters from Volumes IV, VI, and IX of The Cambridge History to provide in a single volume the economic, social and political ideologies of Latin America since 1870. This, it is hoped, will be useful for both teachers and students of Latin American history and of contemporary Latin America. Each chapter is accompanied by a bibliographical essay.

First published in 1977, this reissue contains original articles by contemporary leading scholars in the field of Latin American politics on a range of topics including: working class organisation, populism and US labour imperialism. It will be of interest to anthropologists, students of political science and specialists in Latin American studies.

In recent years several Latin American countries have adopted a more assertive and autonomous stance in their foreign policy. The growing rejection of neo-liberalism as an ideological dogma seems to have given space to more pragmatic stances in favour of national interests.