Search

Studies of the political behavior of the citizens of various countries, the course and outcomes of elections, and the organization and functioning of parties dominated the time and intellectual energies of political sociologists in the 1960s. Much of this work was associated with political sociologist Stein Rokkan, scholars connected with him, or those whose work was facilitated by him. This paper makes use of a collection of essays and articles of the book "Citizens, Elections, Parties," in order to raise some issues concerning dominant intellectual perspectives in the field and the implications for research priorities. Two of the major themes in this article will be considered. First, the model of nation-building and secondly, the proposed agenda for research on a problem which has barely begun to be studied. It will also include institutional and structural comparisons of the different ways in which the pressures of the mass electorate, the parties and the elective bodies are dovetailed into a broader system of decision-making among interest organizations and private and public corporate units.

The large landholder remains an economic and political force in Latin America today. While his once almost absolute power to control and establish the patterns of the Latin American socioeconomic structure must increasingly be shared with other groups—military, industrial and commercial, not to mention foreign—the degree to which he still influences these nations as they strive for development is of major significance. In this paper an attempt is made to study the latifundista's impact upon the economic development of Latin American countries by the examination of the effect of his income and expenditure patterns on the key determinants of national product—investment, consumption, and foreign trade balances. This approach largely ignores such economic questions as the effects of the latifundista, except by investment, on agricultural production and resource allocation, his impact on economic incentives for others engaged in agriculture, as well as crucial social and political concomitants. These questions, undoubtedly as important as those studied, cannot be ignored in an overall assessment of the effect of latifundismo, and should be borne in mind by readers. That those controlling much of the agricultural wealth may also share in the industrial and commercial wealth of the nation is likely ignored, thus understating the total influence which members of this landed aristocracy actually have on the economy. Nonetheless, the aspects being examined are significant and the conclusions should increase our understanding of problems related to income distribution and the availability of domestic financing for economic development. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]