This essay reclaims a political proceduralist vision of democracy as the best normative defense of democracy in contemporary politics. We distinguish this vision from three main approaches that are representative in the current academic debate: the epistemic conception of democracy as a process of truth seeking; the populist defense of democracy as a mobilizing politics that defies procedures; and the classical minimalist or Schumpeterian definition of democracy as a competitive method for selecting leaders.

Latin American populism is a strategy for capital accumulation oriented through specific state policies; these may include import substitution and income distribution, and rely on the promotion of small and middle-size manufacturing firms producing for the domestic market. It looks for full employment, expansion of middle and working class consumption, agrarian modernization and broad intervention of government agencies in economic and social affairs. Political mobilization of the new urban masses fueled by social welfare and state-supported unionism constitute the basis of (...) the enlarged relative autonomy of the state vis-á-vis the industrialists benefitting from populist economic policies, and traditional elites forced to accept a partial transfer of land rent and foreign trade earnings. Changes in the international setting and the contradictions emerging from the populist strategy lead it to increasing instability and to a usually abrupt end, followed by the establishment of a right-wing political regime. (shrink)