Social capital in developing democracies Nicaragua and Argentina compared

Introduction -- Part I. Creating Social Capital -- People I Have Known: The Human Face of Popular Politics -- Creating 'we': Sandinismo and bridging social capital -- Creating 'us' and 'them': Peronism and bonding social capital -- Part II. An Empirical Examination of the Argument -- A tale of two neighborhoods: social capital in Nicaragua and Argentina -- Democracy and its competitors: Political values in Nicaragua and Argentina -- Participation, democratic institutions and procedures -- Part III. Making Democracy Work Without Social Capital: Institutional Capital -- If you build it they will come: institutional capital in democratic development -- Conclusion.

"Drawing on extensive field work in Nicaragua and Argentina, as well as public opinion and elite data, Leslie E. Anderson's Social Capital in Developing Democracies explores the contribution of social capital to the process of democratization and the limits of that contribution. Anderson finds that in Nicaragua, strong, positive, bridging social capital has enhanced democratization while in Argentina the legacy of Peronism has created bonding and non-democratic social capital that perpetually undermines the development of democracy. Faced with the reality of an anti-democratic form of social capital, Anderson suggests that Argentine democracy is developing on the basis of an alternative resource - institutional capital. Anderson concludes that social capital can and does enhance democracy under historical conditions that have created horizontal ties among citizens, but that social capital can also undermine democratization where historical conditions have created vertical ties with leaders and suspicion or non-cooperation among citizens"--Provided by publisher.