Rerouting social unrest to institutional politics: The long-term roots of elite responses in Peru and Chile

Massive social unrest broke out in Peru and Chile in recent years, with citizens taking to the streets by thousands and paralyzing the country for weeks. In Chile, political institutions sought to accommodate the popular demands, launching a process of constitutional reform, and four years after the events, the system channelled discontent to institutional politics. Whereas in Peru, political institutions were unable to do this, to the extent that the protests of 2020, which led to the ousting of President Merino, re-emerge in 2022 with more intensity in the aftermath of the failed coup d’état attempted by President Castillo. What explains these differences? Why did massive popular unrest re-routed to institutional forms in Chile, while it re-emerged with more intensity in Peru? To explain these differences, this article looks back in time and proposes an historical sociology approach. The main argument is that the transitions to democracy in both countries were critical junctures that created different configurations of power with long-lasting consequences. The Chilean transition to democracy was the outcome of a pact, or transaction, between two main blocs, which was followed by decades of stability combined with economic expansion, and both political and socioeconomic reforms. Thus, when the elites faced an unforeseen wave of massive unrest, they were prepared to accommodate diverging demands. The Peruvian transition to democracy was the result of the collapse of the Fujumori’s regime, which combined high levels of personalism, anti-institutionalism, and heavy reliance on support from the marginalized masses. Unlike Pinochet’s regime, which negotiated its terms of leaving, the Fujimori’s regime did not successfully institutionalize a political order, and rather sawed the seeds of chronic de-institutionalization of the party system. Thus, when the elites faced political uncertainty, they did not recognize the accommodation of disruptive demands as a necessary step for their own survival. The article contributes to the literature on contentious politics by integrating the critical juncture approach within the debates on the outcomes of social movements. It shows that historical configurations of power moderate the potential impacts of highly contentious waves of unrest.