Skip to main content

Part of the book series: St Antony’s Series ((STANTS))

  • 54 Accesses

Abstract

In returning to democratic rule in December 1983, Argentina became part of the world-wide trend initiated in the 1970s, which Samuel Huntington labelled ‘the third wave of democratisation in the history of the modern world’.1 Argentina mounted the wave with the election of President Raúl Alfonsín, after seven years of severe military dictatorship and a longer term of political instability, which extended throughout the century. After this, ten national elections were held in the country at regular intervals, as well as a great number of others at the provincial and local levels. In 1999, a fourth presidential period was initiated with the election of President Fernando de la Rúa, the candidate of the opposition Alliance who put an end to the Peronist Carlos Menem’s ten years in government. During these almost twenty years of democratic rule, regular, free and fair electoral processes took place and the other core features of democracy were also well respected: extensive protection for civil and political rights, freedom of the press and civilian control over the military.2

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. For the minimal procedural conditions for democracy, consult Dahl (1989). Also Schmitter and Karl (1996: 42–3) for an extended procedural definition of democracy that includes control over non-elected officials, and O’Donnell (2000: 529) who similarly explains that elections must be decisive, in other words, that the winners should be allowed to occupy their posts and to adopt decisions without the veto of non-elected organizations (such as the military). For a meticulous review of current definitions of democracy and the convenience of adopting one ‘without adjectives’, see Collier and Levitsky (1997).

    Google Scholar 

  2. O’Donnell, G. (1998: 113). As the author explains in another work (O’Donnell 2000: 535), these characteristics (horizontal accountability, equality before the law and an independent judiciary) are not components of the definition of democracy. Instead, they serve to describe differences among the cases qualified as democratic by the restrictive definition.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Nelson, J. (1994: 61); Ducatenzeiler, G. and Oxhorn, P. (1994: 42); Dominguez, J. (1998: 89).

    Google Scholar 

  4. See, for instance, Haggard and Kaufman (1995); O’Donnell (1994b); Smith, Acuna and Gamarra (1994); Torre, J. (1994).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Copyright information

© 2002 Mariana Llanos

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Llanos, M. (2002). Introduction. In: Privatization and Democracy in Argentina. St Antony’s Series. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-230-59607-8_1

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics