The Emergence of Anti-Establishment Attitudes and Protest Behavior 

Discontent with established political parties has become a global phenomenon, affecting both developed and developing democracies. Argentina and Chile exemplify this trend, with a surge in anti-establishment views, mass protests, and outsider victories. This is striking given that mainstream coalitions in both countries were ideologically distinct. Why, then, do voters abandon traditional parties—even when clear ideological alternatives exist? 

My dissertation explores this question by focusing on the Southern Cone and employing a mixed-methods approach that combines survey experiments, text-as-data analysis of campaign speeches, semi-structured interviews, focus groups, and case studies. I argue that repeated and consecutive governance failures by different parties—what I term convergence in poor performance—largely drives anti-establishment attitudes and protest behavior. These failures, especially salient since the end of the 2000s commodities boom, include corruption, poor economic performance, and inadequate public service provision. When voters confront multiple alternatives that have previously governed and disappointed, they are more likely to express discontent through protests, invalid ballots, or outsider support. This perspective introduces a framework centered on alternative forms of protest behavior and cumulative retrospective evaluations on different performance dimensions, moving beyond existing research focused on incumbent punishment or ideological convergence.

I also analyze the rhetorical strategies outsiders use to gain support. I distinguish between valence-based anti-establishment appeals—highlighting repeated governance failures—and ideological anti-establishment appeals that depict all mainstream parties as equally neoliberal or statist. I show that in contexts of weak partisan attachments, valence-based messages mobilize the entire electorate, while ideological ones polarize, activating voters along existing ideological lines. By distinguishing among anti-establishment appeals—often treated as homogeneous in the literature—and theorizing their distinct political effects, I contribute to research on populism.

Lautaro Cella, Ipek Çinar, Susan Stokes, and Andres Uribe (2025). Building Tolerance for Backsliding by Trash-Talking Democracy: Theory and Evidence from Mexico. Comparative Political Studies. ▸ Paper

Punishing the Political Establishment When Everyone Fails: Outsider Support and Invalid Voting in Argentina and Chile. Under review. ▸ Abstract

Do LGB Candidates Cause Backlash? The Electoral Effect of Candidate Sexual Orientation in Latin America (with Rodrigo Castro Cornejo). Under review. ▸ Abstract

What Drives Support for Outsiders? The Power of Valence and Ideology in Anti-Establishment Appeals. ▸ Abstract

Do Voters Punish Denialism? Polarization, Democracy, and the Politics of the Past in the Southern Cone. ▸ Abstract

Support for Pro-Indigenous Policies Amid Conflict in Chile (with Michael Albertus).

Chile’s New Voting Rules May Have Derailed the New Constitution, The Washington Post: Monkey Cage, September 16, 2022 (with Eli Rau).

Comparative Rules of Procedures in South America’s Chambers of Deputies, Working Paper N° 117, CIPPEC, 2019 (with Carolina Tchintian and Lara Goyburu).

The Gender Parity Law in Buenos Aires’ Local Governments, Policy Document N° 204, CIPPEC, 2018 (with Mariana Caminotti and Maria Page).

Congress’ Modernization and the Chamber of Deputies’ Rules of Procedures, Policy Document N° 200, CIPPEC, 2018 (with Alejandro Bonvecchi and Nicolas Cherny).