Caciquismo and Coronelismo: Contextual Dimensions of Patron Brokerage in Mexico and Brazil

Abstract

The Latin American middlemen known as caciques in Mexico and coronéis in Brazil are one of the most widespread sociopolitical features of Mexico and Brazil in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. The pervasive institutional arrangements established by such political entrepreneurs at local and regional levels, within the framework of the most “center-dominant” polities of Latin America, are well documented in the literature. In this case, pervasiveness does not imply mere continuity. As changes in structure, meanings, and significance have occurred with the passing of time, the phenomena termed caciquismo and coronelismo have undergone social and semantic transformation. It would therefore be useful to begin by reviewing these historical metamorphoses.

From Caciques and Godfathers to Second-Order Corruption

“…Firstly, we must define the agents and their position in the hierarchy. Brazilian caciques have access to power and influence over other politicians on a large scale (Roniger, 1987). “That cacique matter was common, in every election, the caciques of the parties asked for resources for their support group” (collaborator testimony).…”

“…Personal relationships enhance corruption and political chiefs oversee the distribution of legal and illegal campaign donations. This clientelism and cronyism result in political cliques at an individual level based on reciprocity (Brass et al, 1998; Roniger, 1987). It cannot be said that politicians or executives exerted more power.…”

Militias going rogue: Social dilemmas and coercive brokerage in Rio de Janeiro's urban frontier

“…These conceptualisations build on an important body of urban violence literature in Latin America, much of it developed through studies in RJ. These ideas have emerged through, and are in keeping with insights from historically important and contextually specific studies of Latin American clientelism, including coronelismo in Brazil (Chandler, 1978) or caciquismo in Mexico (Roniger, 1987), which paved the way for thinking about how armed groups can hinge around a central political patron (or set of patrons) (Auyero, 2002;Hilgers & MacDonald, 2017).…”

Élites locales de la costa ecuatoriana y la captura estatal

“…La desigualdad en la distribución de tierras y recursos conexos (agua, créditos, subsidios, y otros) provocó que los pequeños terratenientes se constituyeron en caciques y con el retorno a la democracia jefes políticos o autoridades elegidas a través del voto. La adquisición del poder formal sumado al tradicional reforzó el cacicazgo, es decir aseguraron un conjunto de redes en las que ejercen dominio y poder dentro unos ámbitos locales y se constituyen en intermediarios con élites nacionales, generalmente pueden ocupar cargos burocráticos en instancias locales, o ejercen una autoridad informal en sus territorios (Roniger, 1987). Ahora debemos tener claro que los caciques contemporáneos distan de las figuras de los caciques coloniales, que en su mayoría eran líderes indígenas y fungían como intermediarios, en cambio ahora son miembros de las clases medias con cierta influencia política-social en ámbitos rurales o ciudades pequeñas (notarios o profesionales), o capacidad económica (empresarios, pequeños terratenientes) que utilizan su posición social o económica para adquirir mayor cantidad de bienes o poder y ascender en la escala social (Cueva, 2015).…”