Search
Browse By Day
Browse By Time
Browse By Person
Browse By Mini-Conference
Browse By Division
Browse By Session or Event Type
Browse Sessions by Fields of Interest
Browse Papers by Fields of Interest
Search Tips
Conference
Location
About APSA
Personal Schedule
Change Preferences / Time Zone
Sign In
X (Twitter)
Session Submission Type: Full Paper Panel
Political competition in democratic countries is increasingly structured around antinomies. While the sharp increase in political polarization begun in advanced democracies, it has now penetrated the developing world. Even if ideological attachments continue to be weak, the crystallization of positive and negative partisan/coalitional identities suggests we might be seeing the rise of affective polarization. Put differently, politics is becoming more tribal. To be sure, in some countries, polarization led to the demise of democracy. In others, however, the consequences have been more mixed. Tribalism sometimes complicates governability, but on occasion also gives politics new anchors of stability, albeit feeble ones.
While there is a vast literature on polarization in the USA, and to some extent Western Europe, much less has been written on the developing world. By focusing on Latin America, our panel features some of the ongoing efforts to address this gap in the literature. Contributors describe the types of political identities that give rise to polarization in the Latin American context, and via cross-country comparisons and single-country studies, also seek to explain the phenomenon and assess its implications for democracy. A theme that runs across most papers is the puzzle of political polarization amidst low levels of positive partisan identification and/or ideological distance. Specifically, what are the societal anchors of polarization under these conditions? Why is it that societies that do not appear to be ideologically polarized, or where few voters feel strongly attached to establishment parties, end up voting for highly polarized alternatives? To answer these questions, contributors rely on regional datasets, as well as on original quantitative and qualitative data from Argentina, Brazil, and Chile.
Latin America’s “New” Polarization: Elite and Mass Levels of Analysis - Santiago Anria, Cornell University; Kenneth M. Roberts, Cornell University
The Social Anchors of Affective Polarization - Ezequiel Alejo Gonzalez Ocantos, University of Oxford; Carlos Melendez, Universidad Diego Portales
Identity and/or Ideology? The Bases of Affective Polarization in Chile - Carolina Segovia, Universidad Diego Portales
Explaining Differences in Affective Polarization in Latin America - Luis Schiumerini, University of Notre Dame; Noam Lupu, Vanderbilt University; Virginia Oliveros, Tulane University