{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02127659574468085, 'fraction_numerical': 0.014801110083256245, 'mean_word_length': 5.848101265822785, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Argentine Unions since 1955 : Power and Politicization in a Weak Party System

This paper argues that a strong causal relationship exists between factional struggles in the Peronist union leadership, the absence of a strong Peronist party, and Argentina’s post-1955 problems in consolidating democracy. During Argentina’s three most recent civilian governments—those of Illia, Juan and Isabel Perón, and Alfonsín—conflict among Peronist union leaders played a major role in subverting incipient efforts at Peronist party institutionalization. Deprived in part by their own factional struggles of an effective Peronist party organization, the powerful Peronist union leaders have expressed their broad political demands primarily through large-scale strikes and demonstrations. This mode of political expression has created a climate of instability poorly suited for economic development and propitious for military coups. Lacking a strong stake in the party system, moreover, many Peronist union leaders have supported (1966) or resigned themselves to (1976) military intervention.