Autor/es
Descripción
ver mas
Colaborador
Aboy Carlés, Gerardo
Melo, Julián Alberto
Materias
Spatial Coverage
Temporal Coverage
1943-1955
Idioma
spa
Extent
369 p.
Derechos
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Atribución-NoComercial-SinDerivadas 2.0 Genérica (CC BY-NC-ND 2.0)
Formato
application/pdf
Identificador
Cobertura
ARG
1943-1955
Abstract
This research focuses mainly on the diagnoses that the opposition political forces made about the emergence of Peronism and the Perón´s presidency between 1946 and 1955. It is known that this stage was characterized by an intense political polarization that, over the years, evidenced a radicalization of the positions of the ruling party and the opposition. This process manifested itself both in the application of increasing governmental restrictions on opposition participation and in the adoption of extra-institutional strategies by a large part of the anti-Peronist camp, which enabled the introduction of political violence towards the last years of government. In this way, this thesis explores how the process of co-constitution of political identities, polarization and extra-institutional strategies developed during the Peronist decade.
This work is based on the premise of considering anti-Peronism a political identity that was able to articulate political parties from different trajectories and ideological origins. Its emergence cannot be understood neither in an abrupt rupture with its past nor in its mere reproduction. In recent years, historiography has consolidated a view that understands Peronism, and also anti-Peronism, in relation to its mediate past, mainly after 1930. However, despite the importance of the anti-fascist tradition under which the rise of Peronism was interpreted by the opposition parties, its emergence -which strongly associated Perón with labor and social policies- surpassed that interpretive scheme. In this sense, this work proposes a review of the characterizations established by Peronism of the main opposition forces throughout the decade.
Perón´s victory in the presidential election of 1946, although unexpected for the opposition forces, did not substantially modify their ways of interpreting the Peronist movement. The present investigation focuses particularly on the recognition by the opposition to the legitimacy and political legality of the Peronist government, which will be variable throughout the decade under study. In the period from the constitutional reform of 1949 to the presidential re-election of Perón in 1951, the government tried to sharpen the mechanisms of control and political coercion over dissident or opposition sectors. In that sense, although the denunciation of governmental authoritarianism did not imply for the anti-Peronist forces an abrupt passage to a non-institutional type of opposition, Perón's resounding reelection with around two-thirds of the electorate revealed that the opposition was still far from being able to electorally defeat the ruling party.
Throughout the decade under study, it is not possible to identify a single and definitive moment that operates as a turning point towards the adoption of mechanisms extrainstitutional by opposition groups. However, the state of internal war sanctioned by Perón on 1951, after the failed military uprising of Benjamin Menéndez, managed to synthesize the denunciations of anti-Peronism to governmental authoritarianism and restrictions on public liberties. A process of growing political radicalization crossed then the relationship between Peronists and anti-Peronists, which both justified their extra-institutional strategies according to the transgressions of the other. In this sense, across the anti-Peronist camp, the opposition forces were traversed by a debate in which various tendencies demanded the adoption of the electoral abstention and the abandonment of the parliamentary seats to ignore the legality of the Peronist regime. This process of radicalization was crowned with the open support of most of the opposition forces to the military exit and to the “Revolución Libertadora”.
This work is based on the premise of considering anti-Peronism a political identity that was able to articulate political parties from different trajectories and ideological origins. Its emergence cannot be understood neither in an abrupt rupture with its past nor in its mere reproduction. In recent years, historiography has consolidated a view that understands Peronism, and also anti-Peronism, in relation to its mediate past, mainly after 1930. However, despite the importance of the anti-fascist tradition under which the rise of Peronism was interpreted by the opposition parties, its emergence -which strongly associated Perón with labor and social policies- surpassed that interpretive scheme. In this sense, this work proposes a review of the characterizations established by Peronism of the main opposition forces throughout the decade.
Perón´s victory in the presidential election of 1946, although unexpected for the opposition forces, did not substantially modify their ways of interpreting the Peronist movement. The present investigation focuses particularly on the recognition by the opposition to the legitimacy and political legality of the Peronist government, which will be variable throughout the decade under study. In the period from the constitutional reform of 1949 to the presidential re-election of Perón in 1951, the government tried to sharpen the mechanisms of control and political coercion over dissident or opposition sectors. In that sense, although the denunciation of governmental authoritarianism did not imply for the anti-Peronist forces an abrupt passage to a non-institutional type of opposition, Perón's resounding reelection with around two-thirds of the electorate revealed that the opposition was still far from being able to electorally defeat the ruling party.
Throughout the decade under study, it is not possible to identify a single and definitive moment that operates as a turning point towards the adoption of mechanisms extrainstitutional by opposition groups. However, the state of internal war sanctioned by Perón on 1951, after the failed military uprising of Benjamin Menéndez, managed to synthesize the denunciations of anti-Peronism to governmental authoritarianism and restrictions on public liberties. A process of growing political radicalization crossed then the relationship between Peronists and anti-Peronists, which both justified their extra-institutional strategies according to the transgressions of the other. In this sense, across the anti-Peronist camp, the opposition forces were traversed by a debate in which various tendencies demanded the adoption of the electoral abstention and the abandonment of the parliamentary seats to ignore the legality of the Peronist regime. This process of radicalization was crowned with the open support of most of the opposition forces to the military exit and to the “Revolución Libertadora”.
Título obtenido
Doctor de la Universidad de Buenos Aires en Ciencias Sociales
Institución otorgante
Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Ciencias Sociales