Contested inclusion: A comparative study of nationalism in Mexico, Argentina, and Peru

This doctoral dissertation is a comparative-historical analysis of the transformation of official national ideologies in these countries during the mid-20th century. It represents one of the first efforts to systematically compare different forms of nationalism in Latin America. Furthermore, the study theorizes changes of nationalism, by tracing and explaining how national discourses evolve over time. As such, the project provides a new theoretical framework and a corrective to the relative absence of theories that explain historical transformations of nationalism---as opposed to its emergence.;Through an analysis of primary school textbooks, this project shows that the three countries exhibited liberal nationalism as a dominant state ideology during the early 20th century. This national discourse adopted a political-territorial understanding of the nation, envisioned national unity as realized in the advancement of "civilization," and depicted national history as driven by benevolent leaders. During well-defined periods in each of these countries, subordinate movements and excluded elites advanced popular nationalism to challenge the reigning liberal nationalism. These alternative national discourses promoted a cultural understanding of the nation, imagined national unity as achieved through a homogeneous national identity, and portrayed popular classes as protagonists of national history.;The extent to which popular nationalism replaced liberal nationalism varied across the three countries. To explain these variations I employ an institutional approach that calls attention to conflicts and alignments between state elites and subordinate movements, and to the timing of state making. Mexico under the government of Cardenas (1934--1940) was characterized by a comprehensive transformation of nationalism. Alliances between state elites and subordinate sectors led to the appropriation of popular national narratives by official ideology. This discursive change unfolded simultaneously with the dramatic expansion of state ideological infrastructure, facilitating the institutionalization of popular nationalism. By contrast, Argentina under Peron (1946--1955) represented a contained transformation of nationalism, in which an already well-established cultural machinery impeded the broad-based diffusion of popular nationalism. Finally, for most of the twentieth century Peru epitomized a blocked transformation of nationalism, marked by the continued exclusion of popular national narratives from dominant ideology. Only under Velasco (1968--1975) did popular nationalism become an official ideology.