¹ Overviews of a large part of this literature are provided in Morse, Richard M., “Recent Research on Latin American Urbanization,” Latin American Research Review, 1 (Fall, 1965), 35–74 Google Scholar; Mangin, William, “Latin American Squatter Settlements: A Problem and a Solution,” Latin American Research Review, 2 (Summer, 1967), 65–98 Google Scholar; and Cornelius, Wayne A. Jr., “The Political Sociology of Cityward Migration in Latin America: Toward Empirical Theory,” in Rabinovitz, Francine F. and Trueblood, Felicity M. (eds.), Latin American Urban Annual (Vol. I; Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage Publications, forthcoming)Google Scholar. Most discussions of Latin American urban affairs by social scientists and historians reflect a substantial intellectual debt to “mass society” theorists such as William Kornhauser and to the early “Chicago School” of urban sociology, especially the ideas of Robert E. Park and Louis Wirth. See Kornhauser, W., The Politics of Mass Society (New York: Free Press, 1959)Google Scholar; Park, R. E., “Human Migration and the Marginal Man,” American Journal of Sociology, 3 (05, 1928), 881–893 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Wirth, L., “Urbanism as a Way of Life,” in Reiss, A. J. (ed.), Louis Wirth on Cities and Social Life (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1964)Google Scholar. For detailed analyses of the Chicago School formulations see Faris, Robert E. L., Chicago Sociology, 1920-1932 (San Francisco: Chandler, 1967)Google Scholar; and Morse, R. N., Urban Sociology (New York: Praeger, 1968), pp. 15–38, 160–72Google Scholar.

² Lawrence, Cf. Alschuler, R., Political Participation and Urbanization in Mexico (Ph.D. dissertation, Northwestern University, 1967 Google Scholar; Ann Arbor, Mich.: University Microfilms, 1968, No. 68-3156), p. 97; Cardenas, Leonard Jr., “Trends and Problems of Urbanization in the U-S.-Mexieo Border Area” (unpublished paper presented at the Conference on Urbanization in the U.S.-Mexico Border Region, University of Texas at El Paso, 06, 1968), p. 4 Google Scholar; and Fitzgibbon, R. H., “Political Implications of Population Growth in Latin America,” The Sociological Review, 11 (02, 1967), p. 41 Google Scholar.

³ The relative deprivation concept is relied upon frequently in research on political alienation in Latin American countries. It is argued that even though many migrants to the cities arrive with a relatively low level of expectations and perceive a relative increase in environmental satisfaction as they compare their present status with their rural past, these early feelings of relative reward give way—perhaps after ten or fifteen years of urban residence—to relative deprivation. Migrant consciousness of economic marginality in the city supposedly increases over time. Such arguments are incorporated into the conceptual framework developed in Gláucio, A.D. Soares, “Desarrollo económico y radicalismo político,” in Kahl, Joseph A. (ed.), La industrialización en América Latina (Mexico City and Buenos Aires: Fondo de Cultura Económica, 1965), pp. 516–559 Google Scholar; Soares, , “The Politics of Uneven Development: The Case of Brazil,” in Lipset, S. M. and Rokkan, Stein (ed.), Party Systems and Voter Alignments: Cross-National Perspectives (New York: Free Press, 1967), at pp. 488–489 Google Scholar; and Soares, G. and Hamblin, R. L., “Socio-economic Variables and Voting for the Radical Left: Chile, 1952,” this Review, 61 (12, 1967), pp. 1055–1056 Google Scholar. For other discussions and applications of the relative deprivation concept in recent studies of urban disorder and civil strife, see Gurr, Ted, “Urban Disorder: Perspectives from the Comparative Study of Civil Strife,” American Behavioral Scientist, 11 (03-April, 1968), 50–55 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Gurr, , “A Causal Model of Civil Strife: A Comparative Analysis Using New Indices,” this Review, 62 (12, 1968), 1104–1124 Google Scholar; and Bowen, Don R., et al., “Deprivation, Mobility, and Orientation Toward Protest of the Urban Poor,” American Behavioral Scientist, 11 (03-April, 1968), 20–24 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁴ Cf. Tobar, Margot Romano Yalour dé and Soubie, Edith, “Marginalidad y alienación en la clase obrera,” Cuadernos del Centro de Estudios Urbanos y Regionales (Argentina), No. 9 (1967), pp. 129–132 Google Scholar.

⁵ cf. Martínez, Héctor, “Tensión y conflicto en el proceso de formación de la nacionalidad peruana,” Aportes (France), 7 (01, 1968), p. 62 Google Scholar; and Needier, Martin C., Latin American Politics in Perspective (Rev. ed.; Princeton, N.J.: Van Nostrand, 1968), pp. 63–64 Google Scholar.

⁶ Cf. Needler, Martin C., “Political Implications of Urbanization in Mexico” (unpublished paper presented at the Conference in the U.S.-Mexico Border Region, University of Texas at El Paso, 06, 1968), p. 15 Google Scholar.

⁷ The term is from Soares and Hamblin, op. cit., p. 1054. Cf. Echavarria, J. Medina and Hauser, Philip M., “Rapporteurs' Report,” in Hauser, P. (ed.), Urbanization in Latin America (New York: International Documents Service, 1961), p. 54 Google Scholar.

⁸ Cf. Mayorga, Mauricio Gómez, et al., La super-urbanización caótica (Mexico, D. F.: Prensa Universitaria, 1963), p. 4 Google Scholar; Andújar, Gerardo, “Migración urbano-rural y autoritarismo político,” Revista Paraguaya de Sociología (Paraguay), No. 6 (1966)Google Scholar; and Giusti, Jorge, “Rasgos organizativos en el problador marginal urbano latino-americano,” Revista Mexicana de Sociología (Mexico), 30 (01-March, 1968), pp. 73–75 Google Scholar.

⁹ Cf. Johnson, Kenneth F., Urbanization and Political Change in Latin America (Ph.D. dissertation, University of California at Los Angeles, 1963 Google Scholar; Ann Arbor, Mich.: University Microfilms, 1964, No. 64–2244), pp. 138, 339–340; Johnson, K. F., “Causal Factors in Latin American Political Instability,” Western Political Quarterly, 17 (09, 1964), p. 442 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Burnett, Ben G. and Johnson, K. F., Political Forces in Latin America: Dimensiona of the Quest for Stability (Belmont, Calif.: Wadsworth, 1968), p. 519 Google Scholar; and Rustow, Dankwart, A World of Nations: Problems of Political Modernization (Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution, 1967), p. 245.Google Scholar

¹⁰ Cf. Johnson, K. F., The Guatemalan Presidential Election of March 6, 1966 (Washington, D.C.: Institute for the Comparative Study of Political Systems, 1967), p. 18 Google Scholar; Soares and Hamblin, op. cit., p. 1062; and Soares in Kahl, op. cit., pp. 553-555.

¹¹ Cf. Huntington, Samuel P., Political Order in Changing Societies (New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1968), pp. 281–283 Google Scholar; Hopper, Rex D., “Research on Latin America in Sociology,” in Wagley, Charles (ed.), Social Science Research on Latin America (New York: Columbia University Press, 1964), p. 265 Google Scholar; Kelso, Paul, “A Developing Democracy,” in Ewing, Russel C. (ed.), Six Faces of Mexico (Tucson, Ariz.: University of Arizona Press, 1966), p. 164 Google Scholar; Angell, Alan, “Party Systems in Latin America, Political Quarterly, 37 (07-September, 1966), pp. 313, 316 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Wagner, Philip L., “Political Implications of Rapid Urbanization in Caribbean Countries” (unpublished paper presented at the 57th Annual Meeting of the American Association of Geographers, Miami Beach, Fla., 1962)Google Scholar.

¹² Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1963. See also the detailed interpretation of the Mexican survey results provided in Scott, Robert E., “Mexico: The Established Revolution,” in Pye, Lucian W. and Verba, Sidney (eds.), Political Culture and Political Development (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1966)Google Scholar.

¹³ Another useful source of survey data on attitudinal consequences of Mexican urban development, though lacking a specifically political focus, is Kahl's, Joseph A. study, The Measurement of Modernism: A Study of Values in Brazil and Mexico (Austin, Texas: University of Texas Press, 1968)CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Occasional reference will be made in this paper to the results of a secondary analysis performed on this data, obtained through the International Data Library and Reference Service, University of California, Berkeley.

¹⁴ The actual total of interviews was 1,008, which was upweighted to 1,297 to compensate for under-sampling of Mexico City, done in order to allow for greater interior city coverage. (A complete description of the Mexican sample is provided in The Civic Culture, Appendix A, pp. 514-516.) My use of a place-of-birth criterion in defining the migrant population has certain obvious limitations. For example, we have no indication in a given case of the stages of the migratory process or of the respondent's stage in his life cycle when he arrived in the big city. Thus between the time of departure from the community of origin and the time of arrival in the city where interviewed, a migrant may have lived in several different communities of varying size, perhaps arriving in the interview city with a relatively high degree of anticipatory socialization into urban living patterns (Cf. Anthony and Elizabeth Leeds, “Brazil and the Myth of Urban Rurality: Urban Experience, Work, and Values in ‘Squatments’ of Rio de Janeiro and Lima” [unpublished paper presented at the Conference on Urbanization and Work in Modernizing Societies, St. Thomas, Virgin Islands, November, 1967], pp. 17-18; and Field, Arthur J. (ed.), Urbanization and Work in Modernizing Societies [Detroit, Mich.: Glengary Press, 1967], pp. 72–73)Google Scholar. Analysis of survey data gathered in specific Mexican metropolitan areas does indicate, however, that a majority of migrants to such cities grew up in nearby rural areas and came directly to the big city with no extended intermediate steps. It has been suggested that for Mexico the model of “staged” migration might be an adequate description of the earlier moves from rural villages to large urban centers, but that once communication links are formed by the first movers from village to metropolis, succeeding waves of migrants do not necessarily have to follow in the same steps but may make a single move directly to the large urban center (see Deneke, Jorge Alberto Harth, “The Colonias Proletarias of Mexico City: Low Income Settlements at the Urban Fringe,” [unpublished M.A. thesis, M.I.T., 1966], p. 92)Google Scholar. Support for this hypothesis comes from a number of anthropological and demographic studies of cityward migration in Mexico, including Lewis, Oscar, “Urbanización sin desorganización,” América Indígena (Mexico), 17 (07, 1957), p. 238 Google Scholar; Butterworth, Douglas S., “A Study of the Urbanization Process Among Mixtec Migrants from Tilaltongo in Mexico City,” América Indígena, 22 (07, 1962), p. 261 Google Scholar; and Balán, Jorge, et al. (eds.), Movilidad social, migración, y fecundidad en Monterrey metropolitano (Monterrey, Mexico: Centro de Investigaciones Económicas, Universidad de Nuevo León Google Scholar; and Population Research Center, University of Texas, Austin, 1967), pp. 73-75. It is therefore reasonable to assume that the primary place of urban socialization for most members of our migrant sample was the city where they were interviewed. The “missing” data on prior urban experience and its consequences for the assimilation process in large cities may well be non-existent.

¹⁵ Note that subsequent references to “migrants” interviewed in the Kahl survey pertain only to those respondents meeting our criteria for definition of migrant status and not those employed by Kahl in his original analysis of the data (see The Measurement of Modernism, op. cit., p. 26).

¹⁶ See Camisa, Zulma Carmen, “Effects of Migration on the Growth and Structure of Population in the Cities of Latin America,” in United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Proceedings of the World Population Conference, 1965 (New York, 1967) (E/CONF.41/5), Vol. IV, pp. 408–411 Google Scholar.

¹⁷ See the data reproduced in Horowitz, Irving L., “Electoral Politics, Urbanization, and Social Development in Latin America,” Urban Affairs Quarterly, 2 (03, 1967), Table 2, p. 10 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

¹⁸ Zenteno, Raúl Benitez, “La población rural y urbana en México,” Revista Mexicana de Sociología, 24 (09, 1962), 689–703 CrossRefGoogle Scholar. The best general survey of recent urban growth in Mexico is provided in Unikel, Luis, “El proceso de urbanización en México: Distribución y crecimiento de la población urbana,” Demografía y Economía (Mexico), 2 (1968) 139–283 Google Scholar. Official Mexican use of the figure 2,500 as the breaking point between urban and rural is considered to be highly unrealistic by most students of Mexican demography. The cutting point was adopted by Mexico from U.S. census practice without due regard for differing conditions in the smaller and less developed country. Most Mexican localities of less than 10,000 people are essentially rural communities with few commercial or other urban functions and services. Thus for purposes of this paper, the “urban” population will be conceived as including all those residents of localities of 10,000 or more population.

¹⁹ Financiera, Nacional, 50 años de revolución en cifras (Mexico, D. F., 1963), p. 40 Google Scholar; and Zenteno, Raúl Benítez and Acevedo, Gustavo Cabrera, Proyecciones de la población de México, 1960-1980 (Mexico, D. F.: Banco de México, S. A.; Investigaciones Industriales, Oficina de Recursos Humanos, 1966), p. 58 Google Scholar.

²⁰ Cabrera, Gustavo, “La migración interna en México, 1950–1960,” Demografía y Economía, 1 (1967), p. 357 Google Scholar.

²¹ For data-based analyses of motivations for rural-urban migration in recent Mexican experience, Balan, et al., op. cit., pp. 107-159; Butter-worth, op. cit; and Valencia, Enrique, La Merced: Estudio ecológico y social de tina zona de la ciudad de México (Mexico, D. F.: Instituto Nacional de Antropología e Historia, 1965 Google Scholar; Serie Investigaciones No. 11), pp. 243-258

²² Cf. Negrete, Julio César Olivé and Chán, Beatriz Barba de Piña, “Estudio de las clases sociales en la ciudad de México: experiencias con un grupo obrero,” Anales del Instituto Nacional de Antropología e Historia (Mexico), 14 (1962), pp. 237–238 Google Scholar.

²³ See Cabrera, op. cit., pp. 312-60; and Stevens, Robert P., “Algunos aspectos de la migración interna y urbanización en México, 1950-1960,” La geografía y los problemas de población (Unión Geográfica Internacional, Conferencia Regional Latinoamericana), 1 (1966), 65–72 Google Scholar.

²⁴ Luna, G., “Megalopolis Trends in Mexico,” Ekistics (Greece), 24 (07, 1967), 15–20 Google Scholar.

²⁵ Oldman, Oliver, et al., Financing Urban Development in Mexico City (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1967), pp. 7 ffGoogle Scholar.

²⁶ Deneke, op. cit., p. 32.

²⁷ Wilkie, James W., The Mexican Revolution: Federal Expenditure and Social Change since 1910 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1967), p. 231 Google Scholar. There are some fragmentary data from Mexican government surveys indicating that service deprivation is relatively more acute in the capital's peripheral colonia proletaria zones (see Deneke, “The Colonias Proletarias of Mexico City,” op. cit., pp. 73-74), where over 70% of the adult residents are first-generation migrants. However, survey data gathered by academic researchers indicate that a majority of colonia dwellers do have access to basic urban services (see Negrete, Olivé and de Piña Chán, Barba, Anales, 14 (1962)Google Scholar, op. cit., p. 232).

²⁸ See Browning, Harley L., “Urbanization and Modernization in Latin America: The Demographic Perspective,” in Beyer, Glenn H. (ed.), The Urban Explosion in Latin America (Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1967), p. 91 Google Scholar.

²⁹ Rabinovitz, Francine F., “Urban Development and Political Development in Latin America,” in Daland, Robert T. (ed.), Comparative Urban Research: The Administration and Politics oj Cities (Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage Publications, forthcoming, 1969)Google Scholar. Respondents in Kahl's Measurement of Modernism survey were asked to comment on the adequacy of social welfare services available to them in the Federal District. As the following data indicate, migrant evaluations were significantly more positive than those of metropolitans (the latter defined as respondents living in Mexico City who had been living in large cities at the age of 10):

(Migrant/metropolitan differences are significant here at the .05 level. Controlling for age does not alter the observed relationship between migrant status and positive evaluation of services.)

³⁰ Migrants to the capital city in the Measurement of Modernism survey were asked whether the move had made their lives better or worse. Some 71% of these respondents reported an improvement in living conditions as a result of cityward migration, and 76% stated that they would not consider remigration. Among migrants to the Monterrey metropolitan area surveyed in the Monterrey Mobility Study, 92% reported satisfaction with their decision to migrate, citing improved living conditions as the most important source of satisfaction: Balán, et al., op. cit., pp. 124-28.

³¹ For comparable survey findings from specific metropolitan areas, see Browning, Harley L. and Feindt, Waltraut, “Diferencias entre la población nativa y la migrante en Monterrey,” Demografía y Economía, 2 (1968), 183–204 Google Scholar; and Case, Donald R., “Differentiation among Manual Workers in Mexico City” (unpublished M.A. thesis, University of Texas at Austin, 1967), pp. 71–73, 96–106 Google Scholar.

³² The same conclusion is suggested by the data from the Monterrey Mobility Study. See especially Balán, Jorge, “Are Farmers' Sons Handicapped in the City?” Rural Sociology, 33 (06, 1968), 160–74Google Scholar.

³³ See Kahl, Joseph A., “Social Stratification and Values in Metropoli and Provinces: Brazil and Mexico,” América Latina (Brazil), 8 (0-March, 1965), p. 31 Google Scholar; and Kahl, Measurement of Modernism, op. cit., pp. 175, 182-183.

³⁴ Mexican government statistics for 1959 indicate that over half of the nation's five million agricultural workers were employed for only 145 days or less during the year (cited in U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Labor in Mexico [Washington, D.C., 1963 Google Scholar; BLS Report No. 251], p. 40).

³⁵ See Balan, Jorge, “Migrant-Native Socioeconomic Differences in Latin American Cities: A Structural Analysis,” Latin American Research Review, 4 (Spring, 1969), p. 21 Google Scholar; and Reyna, José Luis, “Some Patterns of Occupational Mobility: The Mexican Case,” Social Research, 35 (Autumn, 1968), 540–564 Google Scholar.

³⁶ Cf. Germani, Gino, “Social and Political Consequences of Mobility,” in Smelser, Neil J. and Lipset, S. M. (eds.), Social Structure and Mobility in Economic Development (Chicago: Aldine, 1966), pp. 391–394 Google Scholar; and Armstrong, W. R. and McGee, T. G., “Revolutionary Change and the Third World City: A Theory of Urban Involution,” Civilisations (Belgium), 18 (1968), 353–376 Google Scholar. Official statistics show that between 1950 and 1957, the income of the poorest 20% of the Mexican population decreased in both relative and absolute terms: Ifigenia de Navarrete, M., “Income Distribution in Mexico,” in López, Enrique Pérez, et al., Mexico's Recent Economic Growth (Austin: University of Texas Press, 1967), pp. 166, 170 Google Scholar. The data on migrant perceptions of upward mobility and job satisfaction provided by the Measurement of Modernism survey are of particular interest in this connection. Migrants were asked whether they had gotten farther than they expected (in terms of occupational or career objectives), or not as far. Obtained responses are as follows:

Farther than respondent expected 72%

Equal with what respondent expected 23

Not as far as expected 5

In addition, some 72% of the same respondents reported that they held jobs which were “good” or “fine” in their estimation.

³⁷ Cf. Lambert, Denis, “The Accelerated Urbanisation of Latin America and the Formation of a Tertiary Refuge Sector,” Civilisations (Belgium), 15 (1965), 158–174, 309–325, 477–492 Google Scholar; Cardoso, Fernando H. and Reyna, José Luis, “Industrialization, Occupational Structure, and Social Stratification in Latin America,” in Blasier, Cole (ed.), Constructive Change in Latin America (Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, 1968), pp. 22–44 Google Scholar; and Reyna, , Social Research, 35 (1968)Google Scholar, op. cit., pp. 542–543.

³⁸ Comparable data from the Measurement of Modernism survey are as follows:

³⁹ Gurr, op. cit., p. 1109. Further corroborating evidence for Mexico City is reported in Olivé Negrete and Barba de Piña Chán, op. cit., pp. 235, 255-56.

⁴⁰ For a contrasting analysis, based on survey data for Mexico City only, in which urban experience is found to be essentially unrelated to subjective dimensions of living conditions, see Kaufman, Clifford, “Urbanization and Political Involvement: Limited Reflections on the Case of Mexico City” (unpublished paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, Washington, D.C., 09, 1968), pp. 6–10 Google Scholar. On migrant satisfactions deriving from expanded opportunities for home ownership in marginal settlement zones, see Deneke, “The Colonias Proletarias of Mexico City,” op. cit., pp. 77-78, 108; Flinn, William L., “The Process of Migration to a Shantytown in Bogotá,” Inter-American Economic Affairs, 22 (Autumn, 1968), p. 88 Google Scholar; Mangin, William P., “Mental Health and Migration to Cities: A Peruvian Case,” in Heath, D. B. and Adams, R. N. (eds.), Contemporary Cultures and Societies of Latin America (New York: Random House, 1965), p. 549 Google Scholar; and Ray, Talton F., The Politics of the Barrios of Venezuela (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1969), pp. 154–156 Google Scholar.

⁴¹ Lewis, Oscar, “Urbanization Without Break-down: A Case Study,” Scientific Monthly, 75 (07, 1952), 31–41 Google Scholar.

⁴² Lewis, Oscar, “La cultura de la vecindad en la ciudad de México,” Actas del III Congreso Internacional de Americanistas (2 vols.; San José, Costa Rica, 1959), Vol. I, pp. 387–402 Google Scholar.

⁴³ See Butterworth, op. cit., pp. 266-267; and Balán, et al., op. cit., pp. 128-151.

⁴⁴ Cf. Soares and Hamblin, op. cit., p. 1055.

⁴⁵ Ibid., p. 1062; and Soares in Lipset and Rokkan, op. cit., p. 489.

⁴⁶ Lewis also found that the religious life of Tepoztecan migrants to Mexico City appeared to be “at least as vigorous” and “more Catholic and disciplined” than in their native village ( Lewis, Oscar, “Further Observations on the Folk-Urban Continuum and Urbanization with Special Reference to Mexico City,” in Hauser, Philip M. and Schnore, Leo F. (eds.), The Study of Urbanization [New York: Wiley, 1965], p. 495)Google Scholar. Cf. Roberts, Bryan R., “Protestant Groups and Coping with Urban Life in Guatemala City,” American Journal of Sociology, 73 (05, 1968), 753–767 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁴⁷ See, however, the limited data on anomie and attitudes toward political participation among lower-class urban dwellers in Buenos Aires, reported in Tobar, Margot Romano Yalour de and Chirico, Maria Magdalena, “Clase obrera, anomia, y cambio social,” Cuadernos del Centro de Estudios Urbanos y Regionales (Argentina), No. 9 (1967), 1–39 Google Scholar.

⁴⁸ See Farris, Charles D., “Selected Attitudes on Foreign Affairs as Correlates of Authoritarianism and Political Anomie,” Journal of Politics, 22 (02, 1960), p. 53 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and McClosky, Herbert and Schaar, John H., “Psychological Dimensions of Anomy,” in Eulau, Heinz (ed.), Political Behavior in America (New York: Random House, 1966), p. 483 Google Scholar.

⁴⁹ Two of these items (listed as items 1 and 2 in Table 6) were also included as measures of political efficacy in the Survey Research Center's 1956 study of the U.S. electorate. For U.S. data and interpretations, see Campbell, Angus, et al., The American Voter (New York: Wiley, 1960), pp. 515–519 Google Scholar.

⁵⁰ In this discussion we will adhere to the concept of politicization developed in the work of Daniel Goldrich, who conceives of the politicization process as “a continuum ranging from lack of perception of the revelance of government to one's life, through perception of it, to active involvement in politics” ( Goldrich, , “Toward the Comparative Study of Politicization in Latin America,” in Heath, D. B. and Adams, R. N. (eds.), Contemporary Cultures and Societies of Latin America [New York: Random House, 1965], p. 361)Google Scholar. “This concept of politicization has two dimensions: one, the perception of the personal relevance of government, is perceptual [or cognitive]; the other, political activity, is overt and behavioral” ( Goldrich, , Sons of the Establishment [Chicago: Rand McNally, 1966], p. 11 Google Scholar).

⁵¹ Pye, Lucian W., “The Political Implications of Urbanization in the Development Process,” in United States Papers Prepared for the United Nations Conference on the Application of Science and Technology for the Benefit of the Less Developed Areas (7 vols.; Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1962), Vol. VII, p. 87 Google Scholar.

⁵² See, for example, Ashton, Guy T., “Early Adulthood and Mexican National Identity: Consequences of Migrations by Yucatec Adolescent Shoemakers,” América Indígena, 27 (04, 1967), 301–316 Google Scholar; Butterworth, op. cit., p. 265; and Mármora, Lelio, “Marginalidad y conciencia nacional en grupos migrantes,” Aportes (France), No. 7 (01, 1968), 29–46 Google Scholar. Cf. Frey, Frederick W., “Socialization to National Identification among Turkish Peasants,” Journal of Politics, 30 (11, 1968), pp. 943–944 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁵³ At least one analyst has suggested that urban migration promotes competitive party politics in Mexico because of the increased access to individuals resulting from urban clustering, which “permits and encourages transmission of political values to persons who formerly were untouched by political propaganda” (Johnson, Urbanization and Political Change in Latin America, op. cit., pp. 99-100). Although similar arguments have been advanced in subsequent writings (see, for example, Burnett and Johnson, Political Forces in Latin America, op. cit., p. 51), we are not aware of any data which demonstrates empirically the purported linkage between growing strength of opposition parties in Mexico and increased support from in-migrant populations now in a situation of “political availability.”

⁵⁴ Lewis, in Hauser and Schnore, op. cit., p. 496.

⁵⁵ Cf. Almond and Verba, op. cit., pp. 17-18; and Almond, Gabriel A. and Powell, G. Bingham Jr., Comparative Politics: A Developmental Approach (Boston: Little, Brown, 1966), p. 53 Google Scholar.

⁵⁶ The national turnout of eligible voters in the 1958 general election was 49.4%. This was the first such election in which both men and women voted. More recent cross-national survey research in other Latin American countries also fails to reveal any marked increase in participant orientations among in-migrant populations with longer exposure to the urban environment. In Argentina and Chile, for example, longer urban residence was found to be negatively related to higher participation frequencies (unpublished research, Project on the Social and Cultural Aspects of Economic Development, Department of Social Relations, Harvard University, 1969).

⁵⁷ This finding is reflective of those reported in Almond and Verba, op. cit., especially pp. 379–387, and elsewhere in the literature of political development with respect to education as the most accurate predictor of participation levels.

⁵⁸ Cf. Goldrich, Daniel, et al., “The Political Integration of Lower Class Urban Settlements in Chile and Peru,” Studies in Comparative International Development, 3 (1967–1969), pp. 14–15 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Pécaut, Daniel, “The Urban Working Class,” in Véliz, Claudio (ed.), Latin America and the Caribbean: A Handbook (New York: Praeger, 1968), pp. 677–678 Google Scholar.

⁵⁹ A similar pattern emerges from the data on system affect provided by the Measurement of Modernism survey. The two relevant items and obtained response distributions are as follows:

⁶⁰ These results are consistent with Almond and Verba's original finding that Mexicans in general are more alienated from governmental output than from the system itself, especially as the latter relates to and embraces the goals and symbolism of the Mexican Revolution: see The Civic Culture, op. cit., pp. 495-496; and Verba, Sidney and Almond, Gabriel, “National Revolution and Political Commitment,” in Eckstein, Harry (ed.), Internal War [New York: Free Press, 1964], pp. 205–232 Google Scholar). As Kahl has noted, this ambivalence is explained in part by the general cynicism pervading Mexican political culture. “Since a Mexican expects everyone to be out for himself, he is not outraged by self-seeking politicians and union leaders. Nor would he anticipate that things would be very different if the political system were changed. Therefore he does not blame the Revolutionary institutions for the chicanery of his fellow citizens, which he sees merely as a reflection of the Mexican temperament. … He believes in a government whose representatives he distrusts”: Measurement of Modernism, op. cit., p. 116.

⁶¹ See Goldrich, Daniel, “Toward an Estimate of the Probability of Social Revolutions in Latin America: Some Orienting Concepts and a Case Study,” The Centennial Review, 6 (1962), 394–408 Google Scholar.

⁶² Goldrich, Sons of the Establishment, op. cit., pp. 13-15.

⁶³ Johnson, Urbanization and Political Change in Latin America, op. cit., p. 113.

⁶⁴ Ibid., p. 111.

⁶⁵ Computed for all federal entities experiencing a net gain in population due to in-migration in the 1950-1960 period, from electoral data reported in González Casanova, La democracia en México, op. cit., Table 46, p. 249, Table 55, p. 258, and Table 57, pp. 262-63; and net in-migration data presented in Cabrera, , Demografía y Economía, 1 (1967)Google Scholar, op. cit., Table 12, Col. 2, p. 357. This trend does not appear when urbanization is indexed by simple percentage change in proportion of state population residing in rural areas: see Ames, Barry, “Bases of Support for Mexico's Dominant Party” (unpublished paper, Dept. of Political Science, Stanford University, 1968, pp. 23–24)Google Scholar.

⁶⁶ For enlightening commentary on the corruption issue and recent political trends in Baja California Norte, by an ex-governor of the state now expelled from the official party due to his heretical utterances during the 1964 national election campaign, see Sández, Braulio Maldonado, Baja Calijornia: Comentarios políticos (Mexico, D.F.: Costa-Amic, 1960)Google Scholar.

⁶⁷ The analysis of urban political behavior in Brazil presented in Sherwood, Frank P., Institutionalizing the Grass Roots in Brazil: A Study in Comparative Local Government (San Francisco: Chandler, 1967)Google Scholar, especially pp. 28-30, points toward essentially the same conclusion with respect to that country.

⁶⁸ Hobsbawm, E. J., “Peasants and Rural Migrants in Politics,” in Véliz, Claudio (ed.), The Politics of Conformity in Latin America (New York and London: Oxford University Press, 1967), p. 60 Google Scholar.

⁶⁹ One recent study of political consequences of urbanization in Mexico utilizing such an aggregate data approach is Alschuler, op. cit.

⁷⁰ See Weiner, Myron, “Urbanization and Political Protest,” Civilisations (Belgium), 17 (1967), p. 50 Google Scholar; and Soares and Hamblin, op. cit., p. 1064.

⁷¹ Cf. Huntington, op. cit., p. 283. As Kaiman Silvert has suggested, there is need to abandon the conventional view that “the mere fact of an urban agglomeration means a specific set of things for the persons who live in that agglomeration” in favor of a more probabilistic viewpoint, “that urban conglomerations in any part of the world can lead to a very broad variability of human reactions” ( Silvert, , “Seminar Summary,” Proceedings of the Seminar on Social Science and Urban Development in Latin America, Jahuel (Aconcagua), Chile, 04, 1968, forthcoming)Google Scholar.

⁷² Parallel conclusions are reached with reference to other Latin American political systems in Dix, Robert H., Colombia: The Political Dimensions of Change (New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1967), pp. 40–41 Google Scholar; and Goldrich, Daniel, “Peasants' Sons in City Schools: An Inquiry into the Politics of Urbanization in Panama and Costa Rica,” Human Organization, 23 (Winter, 1964), 328–333 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁷³ As Almond and Verba have observed, “The Mexican system may be described as living off its capital of system affect. Unless the output performance of the system can match the aspirations of the citizens (and what is relevant is not the objective level of output, but the evaluation of its adequacy by the citizens), then the Mexican pattern … may have within it the seeds of instability”: The Civic Culture, op. cit., p. 497.

⁷⁴ See Leeds and Leeds, “Brazil and the Myth of Urban Rurality,” op. cit., pp. 31, 35; and Mangin, William P., “Poverty and Politics in Cities of Latin America,” in Bloomberg, Warner Jr., and Schmandt, Henry J. (eds.), Power, Poverty, and Urban Policy (Vol. II: Urban Affairs Annual Reviews; Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage Publications, 1968), pp. 419–420 Google Scholar.

⁷⁵ See Bourricaud, François, “Lima en la vida política peruana,” América Latina (Brazil), 7 (10-December, 1964), 89–95 Google Scholar; Halperin, Ernst, “The Decline of Communism in Latin America,” Atlantic Monthly, 215 (05, 1965), 65–70 Google Scholar; Jones, George F., “Urbanization and Voting Behavior in tinctive mix of economic pressures, social con-Venezuela and Chile, 1958-1964” (unpublished M.A. thesis, Stanford University, 1967)Google Scholar; Mangin, , Latin American Research Review, 2 (1967), pp. 82–85 Google Scholar; Peattie, Lisa Redfield, The View from the Barrio (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1968), pp. 139–40Google Scholar; Powell, Sandra, “Political Participation in the Barriadas [of Lima, Peru]: A Case Study” (unpublished paper, Dept. of Political Science, San Francisco State College, 1969)Google Scholar; Rios, José Arthur, “El pueblo y el político,” Política (Venezuela), (02, 1960), 11–36 Google Scholar; Roberts, Bryan, “Politics in a Neighborhood of Guatemala City,” Sociology (London), 2 (05, 1968), 185–204 Google Scholar, and idem, “Poverty and Politics in Guatemala City” (unpublished paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Anthropological Association, Seattle, Wash., November, 1968). Nevertheless, the radicalization conception cannot simply be dismissed as mere folklore lacking any empirical referent in Latin American experience, past, present, or future. As Germani and others have noted, the conventional wisdom would appear to have a rather high degree of fit with the Argentine situation in the Perón era (see Germani, Gino, “The Transition to a Mass Democracy in Argentina,” in von Lazar, Arpad and Kaufman, R. R. (eds.), Readings in Latin American Politics (Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1969), pp. 138–140 Google Scholar; and Andújar, , Revista Paraguaya de Sociología, 6 (1966)Google Scholar, op. cit.); and it may also be accurately descriptive of some aspects of the situation in Santo Domingo during the 1965 Dominican revolt (see José, A. Moreno, Barrios in Arms: Revolution in Santo Domingo (Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, forthcoming)Google Scholar, Chap. 5). Moreover, the evidence is as yet too fragmentary to discount the applicability of the radicalization proposition to second and third generation in-migrants, even though the data which have been reported thus far do not reveal any significant radicalization of the second generation in terms of support for extremist parties, frustration of socio-economic expectations, or diminished confidence in existing socio-political institutions: see Goldrich, , Human Organization, 23 (1964)CrossRefGoogle Scholar, op. cit., pp. 332-333; and Gurrieri, Adolfo, Situación y perspectivas de la juventud en una población urbana popular (Santiago de Chile: United Nations, Economic Commission for Latin America, 1965; Doc. E/LACCY/ BP/L.2), pp. 16–18, 24–27 Google Scholar. Yet with respect to newly-arrived migrants and first generation in-migrants in general—the groups to which the commonly-accepted notions of “explosive potential” are most frequently applied—theorists do indeed “have a burden of proof that there is an empirical reality that corresponds to their abstractions”: Kahl, Measurement of Modernism, op. cit., p. 97.

⁷⁶ See Balán, , Latin American Research Review, 4 (1969)Google Scholar (summarizing survey data from Brazil, Argentina, Chile, Mexico, and El Salvador), op. cit.; Briones, Guillermo, “Movilidad ocupacional y mercado de trabajo en el Perú,” América Latina, 6 (07-September, 1963), 63–76 Google Scholar; Hutchinson, Bertram, “Urban Social Mobility Rates in Brazil Related to Migration and Changing Occupational Structure,” América Latina, 6 (07-September, 1963), 47–61 Google Scholar; Leeds and Leeds, “Brazil and the Myth of Urban Rurality,” op. cit., pp. 16-17; Martínez, Héctor, “Las migraciones internas en el Perú,” Aportes (France), 10 (10, 1968), pp. 144–145 Google Scholar; and McGreevey, William P., “Causas de la migración interna en Colombia,” in Centro de Estudios sobre Desarrollo Económico (CEDE), Empleo y desempleo en Colombia (Bogotá: Ediciones Universidad de los Andes, 1968), p. 215 Google Scholar. For a general discussion of the methodological inadequacies of the migrant/non-migrant dichotomy for social science research on Latin America, see Browning, Harley L. and Feindt, Waltraut, “Natives vs. Migrants: A False Dichotomy?” (unpublished paper, Population Research Center, University of Texas at Austin, 1967)Google Scholar.

⁷⁷ Leeds, Elizabeth R., “Political Complementarity of Favelas with the Larger Society of Rio de Janeiro” (unpublished paper presented at the 37th International Congress of Americanists, Mar del Plata, Argentina, 09, 1966 Google Scholar; forthcoming in Leeds, Anthony (ed.), The Favelas of Rio (Austin: University of Texas Press for the Institute of Latin American Studies)Google Scholar; Rogler, Lloyd H., “Slum Neighborhoods in Latin America,” Journal of Inter- American Studies, 9, (10, 1967), 507–528 CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Several forthcoming survey studies of lower-class urban settlements will provide extensive data on the operation of this variable in the Mexican context. These include Eckstein, Susan, “Social, Economic, Political, and Cultural Integration of the Urban Poor in Mexico City” (title approx.; Ph.D. dissertation in progress, Columbia University)Google Scholar; Ornelas, Charles, “Land Tenure Sanctions, and Politicization in Mexico City” (Ph.D. dissertation in progress, University of California, Riverside)Google Scholar; and Cornelius, Wayne A. Jr., “Political Correlates of Migrant Assimilation in Mexican Urban Environments” (PhD. dissertation in progress, Stanford University)Google Scholar.

⁷⁸ The work of Oscar Lewis and John F. C. Turner also suggests the need for examination of differential structural and contextual properties of lower-class urban settlement zones in Latin American cities. In his well-known anthropological study, The Children of Sánchez (New York: Vintage Books-Random House, 1963, pp. xii–xviii)Google Scholar, Lewis describes sharp economic and socio-psychological contrasts between two slum neighborhoods in Mexico City which he studied in depth. Similarly divergent sets of characteristics and functions are ascribed by Turner to the “bridgehead” and “consolidation” settlements of metropolitan Lima, : “Uncontrolled Urban Settlement: Problems and Policies,” International Social Development Review (United Nations), 1 (1968), pp. 116–120 Google Scholar, and idem, The Squatter Revolution: Housing as a Vehicle for Social Change (Cambridge: MIT Press, forthcoming). See also the conceptualization of “slums of hope” and “slums of despair” in Stokes, Charles J., “A Theory of Slums,” Land Economics, 38 (08, 1962), 187–197 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.