Neo-populism in Peru

Introduction

In recent decades, served to introduce an even more unfavorable set of institutional conditions. Strong movement to the neoliberal policies under the Fujimori has coincided with an increase in mineral prices (since 1990), which saved the country from severe economic recession induced by the sudden stabilization. Combination, however, was not healthy because of his attachment. Events "Fuji era quite well known outside Peru. When he came to power promising the poor an alternative economic policy, Fujimori soon decided that international support is required neoliberal commitments. As mineral prices rose in mid-1990's, orthodox economic policies and smoothing the way foreign investors seemed to make sense.

1992 capture of Abimael Guzman intelligence forces, the leader of Sendero Luminoso, and with him one third of the leadership group, gave Fujimori Twin victory in the war against terrorism and inflation, and exports propelled growth has allowed the Orthodox stabilization measures to slow the rise in prices. "Strengthen" the victory of Fujimori's anti-democratic coup, the closing of the congress. During the dictatorship attendance policy of co-optation and the attacks on the organization further weakened democratic institutions and reduce opportunities for participation. When "Fuji era ended in November 2000 with the impact of corruption, the stage would seem set for a more progressive policy. The transition government of Valentin Paniagua has recorded important achievements, such as the launch of the CVR and the various institutional reforms, but the popular organizations were too weak to seize the opportunity. A clear indicator of this is that the CVR was not representative of the indigenous people, the main victim in this conflict. It also illustrates well the situation of indigenous movements in Peru after Fujimori.

Those who support the populist leader are not just passive and gullible individuals, fooled by empty rhetoric and calculatedly vague promises. We must assume that they have good reasons to make their choice1. This does not mean that images, symbols, and narratives do not play a key role in their political attitudes and behavior. Followers are mobilized against what they perceive as the guardians of the status quo2: the party system, the privileged minorities, the special interest groups, the ruling class, etc. This perception is built on the grounds of specific representations of the national past, present, and future: What kind of country do we have? What kind of country can we have? What kind of country should we have? While required to produce short-term results, populist leaders also have to address these far-reaching questions in order to gain and uphold popular support (particularly when the short-term results do not seem to benefit the "ordinary" people). They have to put forward a plausible (though not necessarily realistic) project for the country's "take-off". Populism, in this sense, is usual of societies burdened by "unfinished aspirations" (Adelman, 1998). It is not a coincidence that populist leaders tend to emerge in "rich countries" (in terms of natural endowments, but also in terms of what is seen as an important national, cultural or ethnic heritage and destiny) with ...