{"title":"Property Threats, Antistatism, and Business Organization in Latin America","authors":"Gabriel Ondetti","doi":"10.1353/wp.2023.0002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"abstract :Business elites' ability to act collectively is influenced by the scope of their political organization. Within Latin America, large cross-national differences exist on this variable. Some countries have strong encompassing associations that can speak authoritatively for the private sector as a whole, but others do not. This article examines the causes of these differences through a comparative historical analysis of Brazil, Chile, and Mexico. The existing scholarship offers three explanations of variance in business organizational scope in the region, focusing on threats, state encouragement, and the mode of transition to neoliberalism, respectively. This article argues that the explanations involving state encouragement and neoliberal transition are unconvincing. Although the focus on threat is more satisfying, the existing perspective on threat should be refined in two important ways. One is by emphasizing the centrality of threats to private property. Threats of other types may induce temporary cooperation, but what distinguishes cases of strong and enduring encompassing organization is the occurrence of major property threats. The second refinement is to specify that ideas about the state provide the causal mechanism linking threat to organization. Property threats engender encompassing organization by institutionalizing, within the business community, views that underscore the dangers of state economic intervention.","PeriodicalId":48266,"journal":{"name":"World Politics","volume":"21 1","pages":"145 - 187"},"PeriodicalIF":4.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"World Politics","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/wp.2023.0002","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
abstract :Business elites' ability to act collectively is influenced by the scope of their political organization. Within Latin America, large cross-national differences exist on this variable. Some countries have strong encompassing associations that can speak authoritatively for the private sector as a whole, but others do not. This article examines the causes of these differences through a comparative historical analysis of Brazil, Chile, and Mexico. The existing scholarship offers three explanations of variance in business organizational scope in the region, focusing on threats, state encouragement, and the mode of transition to neoliberalism, respectively. This article argues that the explanations involving state encouragement and neoliberal transition are unconvincing. Although the focus on threat is more satisfying, the existing perspective on threat should be refined in two important ways. One is by emphasizing the centrality of threats to private property. Threats of other types may induce temporary cooperation, but what distinguishes cases of strong and enduring encompassing organization is the occurrence of major property threats. The second refinement is to specify that ideas about the state provide the causal mechanism linking threat to organization. Property threats engender encompassing organization by institutionalizing, within the business community, views that underscore the dangers of state economic intervention.
期刊介绍:
World Politics, founded in 1948, is an internationally renowned quarterly journal of political science published in both print and online versions. Open to contributions by scholars, World Politics invites submission of research articles that make theoretical and empirical contributions to the literature, review articles, and research notes bearing on problems in international relations and comparative politics. The journal does not publish articles on current affairs, policy pieces, or narratives of a journalistic nature. Articles submitted for consideration are unsolicited, except for review articles, which are usually commissioned. Published for the Princeton Institute for International and Regional Affairs