Introduction

Latin America is the region of the Western Hemisphere south of the United States. Latin America is diverse and includes some of the world’s largest cities and countless smaller towns with ancient traditions. Some countries have large indigenous communities; others have majorities of African origin, while others are of European origin. The region’s predominant “ethnicity” is a mixture of all of them, called “mestizo.” Each country has distinct and rich cuisines, literature, and arts. People of the Americas identify themselves by nationality, such as Guatemalan or Dominican. The terms “Latina” and “Latino” apply only to people from Latin America living in the United States.

Latin America shares common trends from its colonial past. One of the most prevalent is the hierarchical structure of society. The colonial plan for the Spanish, Portuguese, and French was to be at the top of Latin American society, enjoying power and wealth. Indigenous and African peoples were at the bottom, with mestizos in between. Independence promised the end of inequality, but that promise was not fulfilled. The history of modern Latin America is the story of constant struggles between elite groups fighting to retain privileges, and the rest of society fighting to gain power.

Each Latin American nation followed a different path, but conflict between elites and popular groups was a common trend. Economic and political events swung back and forth like the pendulum on an old clock, swaying between elites retaining power and popular groups advancing. Of course, there is change as a result of the swaying, and not all countries moved in the same direction at the same time. Elites and popular groups both change over time.

In this article, we study the swing of this pendulum to explain the history of modern Latin America since World War II. We use Brazil, Venezuela, and Chile as examples to illustrate the 70 years of history of more than 20 different countries.

Before World War II, the pendulum swung left

In the early twentieth century, the pendulum was secured on the right by dictators, as in Venezuela, or military- supported elites, as in Brazil and Chile. Their wealth and power depended on minerals and food exported to the industrialized world. Workers and peasants who produced this wealth were overworked and underpaid. The middle class grew as modernization required more lawyers, doctors, and merchants, among others. These classes united in their resentment against elites. They tried to replace the export economy with a progressive economy, advocating for land reform, workers’ rights, and national industries. Progressive presidents emphasized social justice and democracy. They defeated elites with popular support, and women attained the right to vote—pushing the pendulum to the left.

After the war, the pendulum swung right

The end of World War II radicalized politics. On the left, radicals sought a classless society through violent revolutions. On the right, the U.S. supported elites and militaries in order to secure Latin American exports and fight communism. The U.S. trained Latin American military officers in anti-communist ideology and anti-guerrilla tactics. Progressive presidents were accused of communist sympathies and toppled by their armies, which further radicalized the left. The military reacted aggressively, swinging the pendulum further right.

Brazil’s progressive period ended with a military coup in 1964. Political parties were eliminated, and war was declared on all leftist sympathizers, not just the radicals. The economy grew, but so did poverty. In 1970, Chile elected the first Marxist president in Latin America. The United States questioned the election and boycotted the Chilean economy to force his downfall, but it didn’t work. In 1973, the U.S. government supported a bloody coup led by the head of Chile’s military, General Augusto Pinochet.

Under Pinochet, a long “Dirty War” started against the left. Leftist leaders, sympathizers, and family members could be kidnapped in the night. Tens of thousands were tortured and then “disappeared” by the regime. This so-called war had an international reach within Latin America. In contrast to Brazil and Chile, Venezuela managed to avoid a prolonged dictatorship and kept the pendulum on the left. Moderate reformists and leftist politicians successfully created a power-sharing coalition against the elite.

Neoliberalism and the pink tide

The 1970s experienced a violent economic swing. Initially, exporters enjoyed a boom. Thanks to borrowing, governments expanded social programs and reinforced infrastructure. However, in 1978, the price of exports collapsed, and lenders began to demand payback with interest. Countries were unable to pay their debts and their economies collapsed, opening an opportunity for neoliberalism, an economic model that favors the export economy. This type of economy benefits the elites while reducing government spending on social programs. Neoliberalism revived the economies of Latin America, but standards of living fell. Neoliberalism kept the pendulum on the right, even as popular resistance strove to push it leftward. A new generation of leftist presidents advocated a democratic socialist revolution, known as the pink tide.

When Brazilian and Chilean economies collapsed, their military governments lost credibility and they were forced to surrender power in the 1980s. However, the military continued to control elections. The new governments implemented neoliberalism. The declining standards of living throughout the 1990s revived the left, resulting in the election of two of the most effective leaders of the pink tide era: Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, who became president of Brazil, and Michelle Bachelet, the first female president of Chile.

Each improved their economies, dropping poverty levels. Years later, accusations of corruption destroyed their legacy. In 2019, neoliberalism returned to Chile, while Brazilians elected anti-establishment candidate Jair Bolsonaro, a populist longing for the military era.

In Venezuela, the collapse of oil prices destroyed the economy during the 1980s. Neoliberal policies stabilized the economy, but the poor paid the price. In 1998, a former military officer, Hugo Chavez, became president, promising to empower the poor. His presidency benefited from rising oil prices, creating a clientelistic political system consisting of showering favors on his supporters while refusing to help non-party members. He died of cancer in 2013. Nicolas Maduro became his political heir just as oil prices and the economy collapsed again. Despite fierce domestic unrest, as of 2020, Maduro has continued to hold onto power.

Conclusion

Latin America has been haunted by the legacy of a hierarchical society. The past 70 years have been a constant fight in favor of and against the structures that support it. Liberals and nationalists, dictators and populists, conservatives and progressives, military regimes and reformers, neoliberals, and the pink tide are different names for similar forces. These forces have kept the pendulum of Latin American politics swinging left to right and back again for decades. Today, both neoliberalism and the pink tide are losing credibility. Where will the pendulum swing next?