The Political Economy of the New Left

• Published date: 01 January 2019
• Date: 01 January 2019
• Author: Megan Pickup
• DOI: 10.1177/0094582X18803878
• Subject Matter: Articles

LATIN AMERICAN PERSPECTIVES, Issue 224, Vol. 46 No. 1, January 2019, 23–45

DOI: 10.1177/0094582X18803878

© 2018 Latin American Perspectives

23

The Political Economy of the New Left

by

Megan Pickup

New Left regimes have been underpinned by a reliance both on labor and nontradi-

tional social groups and on capital interests related to the primary commodity sector, and

the state has played an important overseer role in these relationships. These states have

attempted to accommodate all these groups by pursuing incompatible populist and prag-

matic policies. Study of the particular configuration of these regimes is important because

they have become simultaneously more inclusive and closed off, generating heightened

social fragmentation. Divisions among the left, the hardening of the right, and economic

frailty render these governments unstable.

Los regímenes de Nueva Izquierda se han fundamentado por una dependencia tanto de

los trabajadores y grupos sociales no tradicionales como de los intereses del capital relacio-

nados con el sector de los productos primarios, y el Estado ha desempeñado un importante

papel de supervisor en estas relaciones. Estos estados han intentado acomodar a todos estos

grupos persiguiendo políticas populistas y pragmáticas incompatibles. El estudio de la

configuración particular de estos regímenes es importante porque se han vuelto simul-

táneamente más inclusivos y cerrados, generando una mayor fragmentación social. Las

divisiones en la izquierda, el endurecimiento de la derecha y la fragilidad económica hacen

que estos gobiernos sean inestables.

Keywords: Political economy, New Left/Post-neoliberal, Populist versus pragmatic

policy, Social fragmentation, Progressive cycle

The rise of the New Left—or post-neoliberalism—in the Americas since the

1990s has generated much discussion. Clearly, with the election of various pro-

gressive governments in countries such as Chile, Brazil, Ecuador, and Bolivia,

Latin American politics has experienced a significant shift. Does this shift rep-

resent a return of structuralist thought, in which governments sought to correct

structural imbalances by undertaking import-substitution industrialization

(Leiva, 2008), or the continuation of neoliberal policies in a new guise? What

are the implications for politics, the economy, and society in general? These

questions become even more urgent in the context of debates over the future of

the left in Latin America. While initially discussion centered around whether

Latin America had reached the end of this progressive cycle (see Aharonian,

2015; Gudynas, 2015; Karg, 2015; Modonesi, 2015; Reverón, 2015; Zibechi,

2015), by early 2017, after the impeachment of Brazil’s Dilma Rousseff in 2016

and the electoral victory of Mauricio Macri in Argentina in 2015, the debate

seemed largely settled. The central concern is what happens now that the

Megan Pickup is an independent researcher in Ottawa, Canada.

803878LAPXXX10.1177/0094582X18803878Latin American PerspectivesPickup / POLITICAL ECONOMY OF THE NEW LEFT

research-article2018

24 LATIN AMERICAN PERSPECTIVES

model appears exhausted. The 14 presidential elections in the region between

November 2017 and November 2019 will provide an important signal of the

extent of polarization, the persuasive power of populism and antiestablish-

ment politics, and the institutional strength of evangelicals. Understanding the

crisis and especially the prospects for leftist governance, however, will require

a fuller understanding of these regimes.

In this article I consider what political economies underpin the New Left

regimes and how state-society dynamics have shifted in Latin America as a

result. In agreement with other scholars (see Bebbington and Bebbington, 2011;

Gudynas, 2010; Petras and Veltmeyer, 2014b; Rosales, 2013), I show that extrac-

tivism and reliance on primary commodities more generally form the economic

basis of New Left regimes. While this represents an obvious continuity with

other periods in Latin America’s history, I argue that there is a significant break

with regard to the New Left governments’ formulation of objectives and poli-

cies and that they play a more interventionist role in the economy in keeping

with their alliances with labor and social movements.

My objective is to examine what the social and economic interdependencies

characterizing the post-neoliberal model mean for capital, state, and society

interests. I identify key changes marking this period: the state’s more direct role

in resource acquisition, greater social inclusion as a result of extended social

welfare programs, the exclusion of communities negatively impacted by

resource extraction, the increased influence of extractive capital, and the rise of

China as a central partner. I argue that the pursuit of more “pragmatic” polices

to win over certain business sectors has been incompatible with the pursuit of

more “populist” policies designed to incorporate previously marginalized

groups. While I approach this phenomenon as applicable to New Left regimes

as a whole, I also discuss differences among these regimes such as the state’s

aggressive action toward indigenous communities in Bolivia and Ecuador as a

result of the coupling of nationalist ideology with extraction. These character-

istics have given rise to a number of frailties including misguided economic

policies, the creation of divisions among the left, and a potential hardening of

the right. Of particular importance, New Left governments have seen a break-

down in their support from many groups, including those once counted as

their supporters, and heightened conflict within communities. Right-wing

forces, for their part, have moved in several directions, from the use of institu-

tional mechanisms to mobilizational tactics and even “hard” and “soft” coups

(Cannon, 2016). These outcomes are a product of the particular configuration

of interests driving New Left governments and demonstrate the inadequacy of

class conciliatory policies over the long term.

In the following section, I present a brief overview of New Left regimes and

establish the framework for explaining the configuration of interests that has

underpinned them. I go on to analyze the interactions between the state and

labor and between the state and capital in order to shed light on the exclusions

and inclusions marking the New Left project. In charting patterns of resource

dependency across these regimes, I attempt to provide insights into the way

various interests have shifted as a result of the combined pursuit of pragmatic

and populist policies and where major differences have emerged. I also exam-

ine the political changes that this dominant political economy has produced.