A few years ago studies of political recruitment in Latin America were virtually nonexistent. Then with the recent discovery that biographical registers contain a good deal of data on the social backgrounds of top level political leaders, a number of such studies have appeared; unfortunately, very few of them go beyond the recitation of biographical data. We now know that Mexican cabinet members are very well educated, that most Costa Rican politicians are members of the liberal professions, and that Argentine congressmen tend to come from the middle classes. What we still do not know is the relationship between these background data and other politically relevant variables.
In this respect, at least, Richard R. Strout’s monograph is a step in the right direction. To begin with, his data come from structured interviews (with 254 candidates for political office) rather than from publications similar to Who’s Who. More important, the author does not stop with a description of social background, but goes on to determine why Mendoza politicians joined their political parties and the manner in which candidates for political office are recruited. He then uses these data on the process of political recruitment to test Michels’ theory concerning the inevitability of oligarchic party leadership.
The book begins with a description of the political environment in Mendoza province and a brief historical sketch of mendocino political parties. It then examines the backgrounds of those persons who were candidates for office in the elections of 1962, 1963, and 1965 and their reasons for joining a particular political party. As far as social background is concerned, these candidates demonstrate remarkable homogeneity; “the candidates of any party grouping tended to be members of the middle classes and descendants of immigrant stock with foreign parentage” (p. 119). Nevertheless, the reasons given by candidates for joining their political party differ appreciably from one party to another. Surprisingly, over a third of the Peronists frankly admitted joining the party for its “electoral possibilities.” The last chapter of the book is an attempt to determine the degree of centralization in Mendoza’s political parties. Strout decides that “Michels’ conclusions about the ‘iron law of oligarchy’ were inapplicable to the Mendocino Socialist parties, but were applicable to other political movements with varying degrees of intensity” (p. 122).
Although this is certainly not the definitive work on political recruitment in Argentina—as the author readily admits—it is probably the best work available on this subject, and as such it deserves a very wide audience.
