In contrast, in Independencia and other Lima shantytowns, confrontational strategies worked well in the 1970s and early 1980s. These were years in which the governments had reformist orientations and resources to spend, and the interests of the community were organized around home ownership and basic public goods. Migrants with recently formed nuclear families developed strong ties with other neighbors in order to meet local demands. New political actors, including religious activists and university students involved in leftist parties, soon linked with these networks, encouraging neighborhood organizations and channeling resources toward them. During this period, leaders and activists had to learn how to pressure the state through disruptive measures.

Democracy opened new spaces for political competition at the same time that an economic crisis hit the poor hard. It was at this point that the informal networks for the provision of basic needs and the political party networks took separate paths. The informal networks pushed to establish new organizations with links to central and municipal agencies that could assist in the establishment of community soup kitchens and mothers’ clubs. Meanwhile, networks of confrontational militants entered the IU and other leftist organizations seeking political power, a process that ended in fratricidal internal struggles and failed efforts to regroup.

During the 1990s, political leaders who emerged in the party struggles of the 1980s returned to their weakened local neighborhood organizations. Such leaders were part of political networks formed by children and relatives of the first estate invaders, people who shared the common experience of having lived through the struggles of the past. Over time, such networks recruited other individuals of different age groups and leftist origins who remained active after the defeat and division of the national left and whose radical values and aspirations contributed to network cohesion.

The neighborhood leaders of the 1990s tried to re-activate their local organizations with a repertory of confrontational strategies that had worked in the past. However, such networks were now operating in communities where the families had become landowners and homeowners and where other networks—aimed more at economic survival—were also in operation. The latter tend to have more elastic ties to individuals or families outside the neighborhood and to specific government agencies and programs in the search for material resources and work opportunities.

Context Matters

In other words, in the 1990s the families in Independencia and other shantytown districts no longer needed political networks that focused on confrontation with the state rather than engaging authorities for their material benefit. Hence, there is now a clear separation between social and political networks, the first seeking access to the state and public resources and the second seeking the greatest possible distance from them. The result of this disjunction is that the once-powerful neighborhood organization remains extremely weak today.

No unique factors guarantee success to some poor communities and condemn others to failure. In fact, by the end of the 20th century, many poor communities that, due to their high levels of popular organization and confrontational forms of action, were considered models of success had found their organizational bases considerably weakened. Meanwhile, in some communities without such long-standing or radical organizational traditions, there has been considerable progress, both in terms of organizational and social impact.

In order to understand these changing patterns, attention must be paid to the opportunity structures available in different historical contexts. To assess how or to what extent a given community takes advantage of its political and economic opportunities, the material interests of the residents who are rooted to their land and their housing situation must be taken into account. The composition of households can restrict or encourage the need and will of the residents to participate in forms of collective action. The success of informal social and political networks in a given community depends on their ability to convert the latent needs and the will of the residents into specific forms of social and political action that will achieve their development goals.