Socialism, nationalism, and populism Perón's ideas were widely embraced by a variety of different groups in Argentina across the political spectrum. During his rule, Perón followed populist policies with an emphasis on social justice, and implemented what was described as "a combination of socialist and corporatist ideas with a strong nationalist accent." Peronism underwent a transformation in popular perception, as initially much of the left condemned it as a fascist or an otherwise totalitarian and demagogic ideology - later many came to see it as progressive given its anti-imperialist and anti-oligarchic orientation.
Emilio Ocampo noted that Peronism "incorporated revolutionary Marxist elements and rhetoric, always appealing to a strong nationalist sentiment."
Rafael di Tella argues that Peronism combined elements of political Catholicism with socialism, which appealed to the Argentine working class and placed Perón "on the left side of the political spectrum" in regards to his views and rhetoric.
Federico Finchelstein states that Perón's ideology should be seen as "the synthesis of nationalism and non-Marxist Christian socialism". Peronism is widely regarded as a form of
Third World socialism, or a distinctly Argentinian kind of a populist, non-Marxist socialism akin to
African socialism and
Arab socialism. Perón's public speeches were consistently
nationalist and
populist. German political scientist Lisa Bogerts considers Peronism a "broader historical movement of communism and socialism", representing a movement different from the mainstream socialist movements in Argentina such as the
Argentine Socialist Party. Ukrainian political scientist Oleksandr Kholod described Peronism as a combination of syndicalism, Argentine nationalism and Christian socialism. Jean-Pierre Reed wrote on Perón's policies: Some have classified Peronism as a form of
social corporatism or
corporate nationalism, arguing that by nationalizing Argentina's large corporations and several industries, Perón blurred the distinctions between corporations and government. At the same time, the state largely assumed the role of negotiator between conflicting interests between labor unions and employers, though Peronism heavily favored trade unions at the expense of business interests. However,
Robert J. Alexander argues that Peronism was not corporatism, and notes that Perón "argued, among other things, that Mussolini had erred in trying to impose a corporative state structure on Italian society, an attempt which Peron saw as having been a failure." Economist
Joseph Schumpeter described Peronist economy as such:
Donald C. Hodges described Peronism as a "peculiar brand of socialism" that heavily incorporated elements of nationalism and Christian social teaching. Main sources of inspiration for Perón and his policies were the Italian fascism of Mussolini, British laborism and the American New Deal. However, Peronists would avoid the socialist label because the
Socialist Party of Argentina was considered a part of the
Infamous Decade establishment, and because atheist tenets of socialism would alienate the working-class supporters of Perón. This prompted the movement to use the label of "justicialism" instead. Nevertheless, Hodges argues that despite its eccentric character, Peronism was a "Christian and humanist version of socialism" that aimed to develop a
syndicalist state. Perón did express sympathy towards socialism in his speeches, stating: "I have not the least doubt that in the twenty-first century the world will be socialist. . . whether it is called populism, socialism, or justicialism." Trade union membership drastically increased under Perón, and amounted to 42% of Argentinian workforce by the time Perón was removed from office - a record in Latin America. Social justice, the main slogan of Peronism, was realized through redistributive policies, which allowed real wages to increase by 25% between 1943 and 1948, while the share of wages and salaries in the national income rose to 50% in 1950. Peronist regime would also introduce a radical reform of workers' rights - Perón implemented paid annual holidays and paid sick leave, established state-paid redundancy and dismissal compensation and workplace accident compensation. One of the most famous Peronist reforms was the
aguinaldo, thirteenth-month bonus to salary which Perón described as his "Christmas present" for the workers. The main and most distinctive element of Peronist economy was the "Social Pact". Perón aimed to turn Argentina into a syndicalist state that would eventually establish "socialism of the non-Marxist variety" as the core of its economy. Peronist "Social Pact" was a system of collective agreements between labour and capital, with the state acting as intermediary to establish an "equilibrium" between the two forces. Argentinian labor gradually increased its share of the national income, reaching 50% by 1955. Justicialism also assumed gradual introduction of organized labour into state legislature, which Perón implemented on a regional scale as an experiment - Chaco received a syndicalist constitution under which half of the state legislature was to be chosen by the provincial electorate of the
General Confederation of Labour. Describing Perón's syndicalism, Hodges wrote: "This was a far cry from Fascist versions of the syndicalist state as representing both owners' associations and the trade unions. With functional representation limited to trade unions, Peron's democratic recasting of national syndicalism favored organized labor." Peronism also lacked a strong interest in matters of
foreign policy other than the belief that the political and economic influences of other nations should be kept out of Argentina—he was somewhat
isolationist. Early in his presidency, Perón envisioned Argentina's role as a model for other countries in Latin America and proposed economical unions with the countries of this region, which was expressed with his phrase: "The 2000s will find us unionized or dominated", but such ideas were ultimately abandoned. Perón would also align himself with socialist states such as
Castro's
Cuba and
Allende's Chile. In his 1972
Actualización política y doctrinaria para la toma del poder, Perón included "perhaps the most revolutionary guidelines ever issued in his name", advising his supporters to reject
Soviet communism while accepting Fidel Castro and
Mao Tse-tung as fellow allies against
American imperialism. Already in his first and second presidency, Perón maintained close relations with the Soviet Union, despite his superficially anti-communist rhetoric. Soviet authorities considered Perón an ally in their struggle against the US. argued that "Perón, with his own ambitions and hostility to the United States, is Stalin's logical choice". Following Perón's removal from power in 1955, "Soviet diplomats revelead a certain nostalgia for the Peronist government".
Attitudes towards Indigenous peoples By the time Perón came to power for the first time, there were around 129,000 Indigenous Argentines in Argentina, amounting to around 0.8% of the total population. Despite their small numbers, Indigenous Argentines played a significant role in the populist rhetoric of Perónism. Perón presented himself as the champion of the working class and introduced a new kind of populist politics to Argentina that would heavily influence popular actions and the worker movement. Peronist rhetoric focused on the cult of the "common man" and vilified anti-Peronist groups which were portrayed as the establishment. Peronist appeal was successfully amplified by Eva Perón, whose fond and passionate speeches attracted the most marginalized parts of the Argentinian society. Peronist rhetoric had significant appeal to "Argentinians" of non-Argentinian ancestry, and Perón legally recategorized them as equivalent to native Argentinians and attempted to reorganize the state institutions responsible for their welfare. Embracing both the Peronist rhetoric and principles of populism, Indigenous Argentine supporters of Peronism became known as the
caciques, and inspired both political engagement and trust in state institutions amongst fellow Indigenous Argentines. Because of this, Peronism made national politics relevant to the non-Argentinian communities of Argenitina for the first time and helped integrate them into the previously disinterested Argentinian nation state.
Mapuche leader Jeronimo Maliqueo described Indigenous Argentine peoples as "the first Peronists", with Perón turning a previously invisible group of Argentinian society into active political actors.
Attitudes towards Jews Argentina has had the largest Jewish population in Latin America since before Perón came to power. After becoming president, he invited members of the Jewish community to participate in his government. One of his advisors was
José Ber Gelbard, a Jewish man from Poland. Peronism did not have an antisemitic bias. The
Jewish Virtual Library writes that while Juan Perón had sympathized with the Axis powers, Perón also expressed sympathy for Jewish rights and established diplomatic relations with Israel in 1949. Since then, more than 45,000 Jews have immigrated to Israel from Argentina". Shortly after coming to power, Perón faced accusations of antisemitism from both his domestic opponents as well as the United States. Jeffrey K. Marder remarks that anti-Peronists "distorted the facts, hastily and erroneously characterizing Perón as an antisemite", while the
United States Department of State portrayed Peronism as a "Nazi menace", publishing the "Blue Book" in 1946. However, most foreign observers started changing their view on Perón by late 1940s and early 1950s - in his 1953 book ''Peron's Argentina'', American historian George I. Blanksten criticized Perón but credited him with disavowal of antisemitism. Likewise, the
American Jewish Year Book reports from 1949 and 1950 delineated problems faced by the Jewish community in Argentina, but found little fault in Perón and his regime. Perón maintained cordial relations with Jewish groups and his interaction with the Jewish community mostly consisted of exchanging favors. Perón's movement was mainly based on industrial workers and the labor movement, which became the very foundation of his support base. However, Perón also attempted to appeal to marginalized and outsider groups of Argentinian society, which included numerous ethnic and immigrant communities. Argentinian Jews had significant influence on socialist and communist parties and trade unions, but stayed on the margins of Argentine social and political life, facing both discrimination and assimilationist policies of the 1930s liberal government. Perón sought to recruit the Jewish community into his Peronist support base as to broaden the support for his "New Argentina" and also dispel the accusations of fascism. In 1947, Perón founded
Organización Israelita Argentina (OIA), the Jewish wing of the Peronist Party, in attempt to promote his ideology amongst the Jewish community. While OIA failed to attract much support of Argentinian Jews, it became an intermediary between Perón and the Jewish community. Argentinian Jews entered dialogue with Perón through IOA, securing favors and concessions. Jewish newspapers in Argentina particularly praised the socialist nature of Perón's planned economy, leading to limited expressions of support. Peronism allowed the Jewish community to actively participate in the political life of Argentina; Jewish writer
Isaías Lerner remarked: "The triumph of Perón meant a greater participation of the [Jewish] community in the political arena. For the first time in Argentina's political history, a political party courted our community." While Perón allowed many Nazi and other WWII-era Axis criminals to take refuge in Argentina, he also attracted many Jewish immigrants. Argentina has a Jewish population of over 200,000 citizens, one of the largest in the world.
Nasserism Peronism is often compared and paralleled with
Nasserism, or considered a variety thereof.
Donald C. Hodges argues that Nasserism and Peronism are so similar that they became interchangeable when referring to the distinct type of populism both movements represented, writing: "The terms "Nasserism" and "Peronism" are interchangeable when applied to the younger generation of left-wing officers in Latin America."
Workers' Revolutionary Party, a
Trotskyist political party in Mexico, stated that both Perón and Nasser were an embodiment of
Bonapartism, arguing that both movements represented what
Leon Trotsky described as "those special governments that rely on the workers' movement, looking for a broader base in order to resist the excessive demands of imperialism." According to Lily Pearl Balloffet, the connection between Nasserism and Peronism was not a mere coincidence, arguing that the Nasserist movement was inspired by Perón and actively engaged in translation projects to make the Peronist doctrine accessible and familiar to Arabic-speaking audiences. In 1953, Lebanese-Argentinian journalist
Nagib Baaclini published an article named "Egypt Has Her Own Perón Now", in which he discussed both the ideological and political closeness of both regimes. When interviewed on the parallels between Perón and Nasser, a functionary of the Egyptian Legation, Ahmed Mattar, replied: "Naguib? ... He is the Perón of Egypt! You Argentines can understand Naguib perfectly, because you have had to fight doggedly, as we have, for your liberty, and you have achieved [this] thanks to your magnificent leader, who is similar to Naguib." Key common features of both regimes observed by the contemporary press were anti-imperialist nationalism, the 'Third Position' philosophy of non-alignment in the Cold War and "socialist" economic policies. The "Third Position" espoused by Perón as well as Nasser is seen as the most important ideological feature of both regimes. In foreign policy, the "Third Position" meant that both Argentina and Egypt would follow a path of development that rejected American and Soviet imperialism in favor of a non-aligned, anti-imperialist stance. Economically, too, Perón and Nasser emphasized the need to pursue a different policy from that of American capitalism and Soviet communism - a non-Marxist socialism, which for Perón was a "national socialism" (or justicalism) and for Nasser an
Arab socialism. The
agrarian socialism of the
Narodniks, the justicalism of Perón, the Arab socialism of Nasser and the "
Third Universal Theory" of
Gaddafi together form a group of "Third Position" economic policies. Political scientist Torcuato di Tella notes that apart from similar ideologies and policies, Nasserism and Peronism emerged in nearly identical socioeconomic conditions - both movements were able to come in power thanks to the large presence of reform-minded middle-ranking and low-ranking military officers. Di Tella refers to both regimes as representing "military socialism", along with the Brazilian
Tenentism,
1968 Peruvian coup d'état and the Bolivian
Socialist Revolution of 1936. Political scientists Elie Podeh and Onn Winckler note that analyzing Nasserism will naturally "rely on insights derived from Latin American models, especially Peronism", arguing that both movements are exemplary of Third World populism. They also note that both regimes have similarities that go beyond populism - as their revolutionary and anti-imperialist ideology went beyond rhetoric and was translated into policies and profound changes in the societies of Argentina and Egypt, Peronism and Nasserism are credited with introducing egalitarianism to erstwhile inequal societies full of marginalized groups; they write: "As was the case in Argentina under Perón, the message of the [Nasserist] regime was clear: In the revolutionary era, talent, rather than social position, determined one's standing. Equal opportunities were open to all."
Samir Amin likewise noted the 'progressive' character of both movements. On Nasser, he wrote: "Nasserism then achieved what it could: a resolutely anti-imperialist international posture and progressive social reforms." Similarly, Amin remarked on Perón: "Perónist populism was anti-imperialist and progressive in its own way. The excesses of language and manners by the general and his wife, Eva, should not take anything away from the positive measures made in favor of workers." Podeh and Winckler argue that Nasserism can be seen as an independent ideology and movement because it went beyond Egypt and affected the political development of the Arab World as the whole, while "Peronism and other forms of populism in Latin America have not radiated beyond state borders". However, Jean Bernadette Grugel notes that Peronism did have impact in the rest of Latin America -
Víctor Paz Estenssoro and the
Revolutionary Nationalist Movement of
Bolivia identified with Peronism, and
Carlos Ibáñez del Campo of
Chile openly identified with Peronism. Feminist
María de la Cruz, the campaign manager of Ibáñez, proclaimed: Peronism and its success also led Latin American socialist to reevaluate their stance towards populism - just like socialists of Argentina broke ranks to support Peronism as a form of anti-imperialism and socialism, Ibáñez was also seen as a movement worthy of support. Grugel wrote:
Alejandro Chelen testified to the fact that admiration for Peronism contributed to the Socialists' decision to support Ibáñez: 'The echoes of Argentine Peronism, very much in fashion then, infected the atmosphere.'" Grugel notes that "Justicialismo,
Titoism, Nasserism,
Maoism and Castroism served as an example for the 'revolutionary' socialists of the 1960s".
Workers Vanguard of the
American Spartacist League also highlighted Peronism and Nasserism as dominating examples of "populist nationalism with a socialist coloration".
Relation to Catholicism The ideology of Perón is considered to have been influenced by
Catholic social teaching and to be a mixture of many political currents, one of them being social Catholicism. Peronism had a corporatist tendency that was rooted in social and political philosophy of the Catholic Church, with its origins in 19th-century Christian socialism and papal encyclicals of Popes Leo XII and Pius XI; this was a common denominator for other left-wing populist movements in the region, such as the one in Mexico and Peru. Peronism borrowed heavily from Catholic motifs, promising a harmonous society free of class conflict and describing its demand for social justice as the need to "humanize the capital" and to "counter a heartless and godless pecuniary capitalism". Perón himself described his ideology of justicalismo as a "unifying Christian movement", and according to
Michael Goebel, Perón rhetoric "had its pedigree in the ideas of social Catholicism". Perón also used Catholic rhetoric to downplay the perceived socialist nature of his ideology, given that Argentinian socialism was unpopular amongst Peronist constituency because of its militant atheism; Hodges concludes that "Perón's peculiar brand of socialism played down the socialist label in favor of its national and Christian sources". Local Catholic hierarchy overwhelmingly favored Perón in the 1946 election, praising him for his focus on social welfare and referring to papal encyclicals. Argentine bishops issued a pastoral letter instructing Catholics to not vote for any part that advocated for a separation of Church and state, which was a direct blow at political opponents of Perón. The Catholic Church had also gained profound influence on Argentinian society after World War I given the decline of militant secularism that once permeated the upper and middle classes of Argentina. Because of this, "the Church was now recognised as a much-needed partner in any political project." The relations between the Church and Perón turned sour around 1949, as Perón attacked the part of the clergy for being "a bastion of extravagance and display" that conflicted with the cult of simplicity that Peronism promoted. Perón argued that a "socially just" Argentina must reject lavishness in favour of "religion of humility" and "the religion of the poor, of those who feel hunger and thirst for justice." In 1952, the Church attacked Perón for allowing the screening of defamatory films in Buenos Aires, along with the introduction of gradual restrictions on religious education in schools. The rift between Peronist government and the Catholic clergy became especially visible in August 1952, when the death of Eva Perón was virtually ignored by the Church. In 1953, a part of Argentinian clergy became "worker-priests" in style of the movement popular amongst French priests at the time - worker-priests took blue-collar jobs in mines and factories to challenge communist dominance of labour unions in favour of promoting Christian socialism. Perón feared that Argentine worker-priests could also try to infiltrate Peronist trade unions this way, and the ambition amongst some Catholic circles to politically challenge Perón was confirmed in 1954, following the attempt to create a new Christian Democratic party that year. By 1953, the relations with the Church became openly hostile, and Peronist legislation legalizing divorce and temporarily decriminializing prostitution further alienated the clergy. In 1954, Perón accused members of the clergy of organizing a conspiracy against the government, although he highlighted "that they were in no way representative of the Church in Argentina". Perón continued to attack what he described as "materialistic section of the clergy", and two Italian prelates were expelled from Argentina. Between 1954 and 1955, the government imprisoned several priests for short periods of time, accusing them of political meddling or infiltration of the state trade unions, and Peronist militias clamped down on Catholic processions and organizations. In June 1955, the Vatican excommunicated those responsible for government's deportation of two Italian priests from Argentina, without specifying any individual. Perón maintained that the excommunication did not include to him, claiming that he was not involved in the deportation in any way. According to an American historian Robert Crassweller, "the excommunication dated in 1955 did not, technically speaking, apply to Perón, "for it failed to comply with certain requirements of canon law." Nevertheless, many considered Perón excommunicated at the time, and his conflict with the Church is considered to have directly caused the military coup against him that year; David Rock argued that "Perón's regime finally collapsed when it turned against the church." According to historian David F. D'Amico, "Perón was later forgiven by the Church, for he died on July 1, 1974, a faithful Catholic, and was administered extreme unction [by the Vatican] immediately before his death." The fusion of liberation theology with Peronism in Argentina was credited with the rise of the far-left Peronist organization
Montoneros. Leaders of Montoneros such as
Mario Firmenich and
Roberto Perdía were Catholic nationalists who belonged to the
Catholic Action, and encountered Peronist priests such as
Carlos Mugica there. David Copello argues that "in their case, religion paved the way towards Peronism", who embraced both the Christian socialism of liberation theology and nationalist socialism of Peronism. Michael Goebel argues that the formation of left-wing revolutionary organizations committed to Peronism was the result of Perón's ideology being formed out of mainly left-wing Catholicism rather than nationalist or neo-fascist currents. Montoneros represented a radicalization of Peronism, promoting Perón's return to Argentina as a first step towards "national liberation", embracing Marxism and naming "socialist fatherland" as their goal. Goebel concludes that Peronism represented an "anti-imperialist and third-world liberation movement more than right-wing Argentine nacionalismo." According to Richard Gillespie, "through its commitment to social justice and the popular cause, radical Catholicism drew many youths towards the Peronist Movement." From there, Peronists Catholics were radicalized into Marxism with the influence of priests such as
Camilo Torres Restrepo, who promoted Peronism and liberation theology as alternative to atheist communism and argued that "revolution is not only permitted but is obligatory for all Christians who see in it the most effective way of making possible a greater love for all men". This resulted in the creation of various communist organizations that were "committed to Peronism, socialism, and armed struggle".
Criticism of Perón's policies Authoritarianism Political opponents maintain that Perón and his administration resorted to organised violence and dictatorial rule; that Perón showed contempt for any opponents, and regularly characterised them as traitors and agents of foreign powers. They also argue that Perón subverted freedoms by nationalising the broadcasting system, centralising the unions under his control and monopolising the supply of newspaper print. At times, Perón also resorted to tactics such as illegally imprisoning opposition politicians and journalists, including
Radical Civic Union leader
Ricardo Balbín; and shutting down opposition papers, such as
La Prensa. In contrast, historian
Alan Knight argues that while "Peronist democracy" fell short of modern standards for liberal democracy, it should nevertheless be seen as democraticizing in the context of Argentinian history: However, most scholars argue that Peronism was never dictatorial. Crassweller wrote on Peronism: "Peronism was not a dictatorship. As the American embassy stated in April 1948, ". . . Peron is far from being a dictator in the sense of having absolute authority." The army concerned itself with foreign policy. Totalitarian methods frequently appeared in the operations of the police, or in repression of the press, or in restrictions imposed on the conduct of opposition, but this falls short of a dictatorship. Peron often had to bargain for support, to trim his sails on the timing of initiatives, and to balance interests that could not be overridden. Strong and authoritarian and sometimes oppressive, yes. But not really dictatorial." Paul Corner and Jie-Hyun Lim similarly argued: "Peronism (like early Cold War populism as a whole) was not a dictatorship but an authoritarian form of democracy." Paola Raffaelli wrote: "Although some authors suggest that Peronism was a form of fascism, this was not the case. He was democratically elected and other parties and the Parliament were not banned, it did not pursue an ideology apart from a less-dependant nation, and Perón was in power three times for ten years within a twenty-eight years period of time."
Fascist influences Perón's admiration for
Benito Mussolini is well documented. Whether Peronism was fascist or not is heavily contested. Historian
Federico Finchelstein, philosopher
Donald C. Hodges and historian
Daniel James argue that Perón was not fascist, while lawyer
Carlos Fayt, historian
Paul Hayes and political scientist
Paul H. Lewis categorise Peronism as a
fascist ideology, Referring to this view,
Seymour Martin Lipset argued that "If Peronism is considered a variant of fascism, then it is a fascism of the left because it is based on the social strata who would otherwise turn to socialism or Communism as an outlet for their frustrations." However, most scholars believe that Peronism was not a form of fascism. Summarizing the academic consensus on the issue, Arnd Scheider wrote that "most authors, analysing the phenomenon in retrospect agree that the term Fascism does not accurately describe Peronism." James P. Brennan remarked that "In general, even those authors convinced of the fascist character of Peronism recognize that its predominant characteristics resemble very little those of European fascism."
Donald C. Hodges remarked that it is a "cheap academic trick to lump together fascism (...) and Peronism". Perón embraced the concept of the state as the juridical instrument that can only function within and serve the nation, but rejected the organic notions of the state assuming the dominating role by organizing the nation. Perón also prided himself in his doctrinal flexibility and elasticity, and agreed with national syndicalism of
Primo de Rivera in principle, although he ultimately pursued a different political path. Hodges argues that "In view of both its gradualism and its concern for striking a balance between extremes, justicialism has more in common with the American New Deal than with either Italian fascism or German national socialism."
Daniel James believes that the neo-corporatism of Peronism cannot be explained by any allegiance to fascist ideas, arguing that Perón "took his ideas principally from social catholic, communitarian ideologues rather than from any pre-1955 fascistic theory." According to Pablo Bradbury, while there was a great divergence between formal Peronist ideology and the wider Peronist movement, the ideology of Perón was not fascist; Bradbury argues that nationalism of Peronism was not rooted in a sense of expansion or imperialist greatness, but was
left-wing nationalism that "found its most prominent expressions in anti-imperialism, whether against British economic dominance or US political interference." He also remarked that "Peronism originated in a military dictatorship, but established a populist authoritarian democracy". The democratizing movement within Peronism was significant, as it empowered previously marginalized groups - Peronism introduced universal suffrage and reshaped the definition of Argentinian citizenship and national identity. Bradbury also points to the racist rhetoric of middle-class and upper-class opponents of Peronism, who called Peronists
cabecitas negras ("little black heads"), portraying the Peronist masses as prone to criminality, unsophisticated, dark-skinned and of immigrant background.
Michael Goebel likewise points to the inclusive character of Peronism that conflicted with the exclusive nature of fascism - non-Spanish surnames were far more prevalent amongst the Peronist leadership than among any other political movement in Argentina, and "even in the more marginal provinces, Peronist politicians often had rather recent immigrant origins." Goran Petrovic Lotina and Théo Aiolfi wrote that "Peronism was never a form of fascism during Juan Perón's first presidencies (1946-55). Nor was Peronism fascistic in its subsequent incarnations over the past seventy-five years from the 1970s revolutionary leftist Montonero guerilla organization to the neoliberal centre-right presidency of Carlos Menem."
Post-Marxist Ernesto Laclau also supported this view, accusing Perón of preying on the 'irrationality' of internal migrants and describing Peronism as "left-wing fascism". Socialist writers Timothy F. Harding and Hobart A. Spalding likewise accused Peronism of preventing the rise of revolutionary and militant tendencies amongst the Argentinian working class by infusing it with "false consciousness". However, validity of this perspective has been challenged by sociologists and historians such as
Ronaldo Munck or
Ricardo Falcón. Historian Walter Little disputed the significance of the division between "old" and "new" working class in Argentina, writing: "Far from being divided, the working class was remarkably homogeneous and explanations of popular support for Peronism must be developed on this basis." Analysing the support of the trade union movement for Peronism, Munck and Falcón wrote: "Perón achieved the support of trade union leaders from the dissident socialists of the CGT No. 1, some of the major unions of the orthodox CGT No. 2, and in particular from the autonomous or independent unions, not forgetting the remnants of the syndicalist USA which had favoured this type of alliance since the 1935 split. Support from the leadership was matched by support from the rank and file." Regarding class consciousness, sociologist Susan B. Tiano wrote that in the Harvard Project, a survey of working-class attitudes in Argentina during the 1960s, Peronism was found to be "a major consciousness-increasing force among Argentine workers." Likewise, Munck and Falcón conclude that "Peronism can be seen as an overall consciousness-raising factor, and the ideological cement for the cohesive and solidaristic social structures of the Argentine working class." == Peronism after Perón ==