Perón isn't overthrown in 1955, completes his second term?

With a POD after 1951, could Argentine president Juan Perón do something to prevent the military coup that led to decades of instability, more coups, and dictatorships, the most brutal one by far being the National Reorganization Process?

Could he have done something to diminish or perhaps prevent the economic crisis that occurred during the last years of his presidency, a better decision in this or that area? That would do wonders to reduce political unrest.

Also, since Perón is a very divisive figure here, I want to remind all readers that this is a discussion focused on how he could've prevented the coup, not his vices and virtues.
 
Last edited:
Some of the causes for the Coup were Peron's loss of popularity in the military (he still had many supporters there as late as 1955, but he told them to stand down), his strained relationship with the Church, his very bad relationship with the opposition (which I'll explain below), and the very slight worsening of his relationship with the working class due to the pursuit of a more austere economic policy in his second term, which was necessary due to the economic situation.

I believe the best shot to avoid the coup, even with the economic woes, resides in him not doing two things:
1. Not try to have Eva as his VP for his reelection (this caused a lot of opposition from the more conservative elements of society, both for having a woman and for her being his wife).
2. Not disallow coalitions for the 1952 election. He would have won anyway, and this was perceived as a very undemocratic action that surely fueled the resentment in the anti-peronist circles of the military.
 
Some of the causes for the Coup were Peron's loss of popularity in the military (he still had many supporters there as late as 1955, but he told them to stand down), his strained relationship with the Church, his very bad relationship with the opposition (which I'll explain below), and the very slight worsening of his relationship with the working class due to the pursuit of a more austere economic policy in his second term, which was necessary due to the economic situation.

I believe the best shot to avoid the coup, even with the economic woes, resides in him not doing two things:
1. Not try to have Eva as his VP for his reelection (this caused a lot of opposition from the more conservative elements of society, both for having a woman and for her being his wife).
2. Not disallow coalitions for the 1952 election. He would have won anyway, and this was perceived as a very undemocratic action that surely fueled the resentment in the anti-peronist circles of the military.
How about not shutting down the opposition newspaper La Prensa before the election? Could that be a good POD too?
 
How about not shutting down the opposition newspaper La Prensa before the election? Could that be a good POD too?
Yes, not taking any of the undemocratic actions he took to ensure his reelection would hugely help. As I said, he would have won anyways since he had overwhelming support.
 
Here's another thing I just found: Arturo Illia, who IOTL was president from 1963 to 1966, ran for governor of Córdoba in 1951 and lost by around 9 points, a relatively narrow margin considering the national Peronist landslide. What if he won? Could the opposition (or at least the UCR) rally to him as a potential presidential candidate instead of agitating for and planning a coup? Assuming the president doesn't try to intervene and remove him by force, which would make things even worse (he was allowed to do that by the constitution, right? I have no idea).
 
Last edited:
As to what would've happened? I looked for and did not find any information on whether he would've ran himself for a third term (the constitution of 1949 allowed him to), but I believe that a Peronist would have won 1958, though by a much smaller margin. Maybe someone like Cooke or Campora could've ran.
 
As to what would've happened? I looked for and did not find any information on whether he would've ran himself for a third term (the constitution of 1949 allowed him to), but I believe that a Peronist would have won 1958, though by a much smaller margin. Maybe someone like Cooke or Campora could've ran.
Yeah, a race that didn't have Perón in it could be very close and potentially very violent, especially if the economic crisis is still ongoing.
 
Could he have done something to diminish or perhaps prevent the economic crisis that occurred during the last years of his presidency, a better decision in this or that area? That would do wonders to reduce political unrest.
Some of the things that have to change for Perón to not face a coup (his actual deposition in said coup is a separate issue) are too intrinsically tied to both his personal beliefs and his party's ideology; his closure of La Prensa for example isn't something that can be changed without fundamentally altering what that early peronism was, which included an opposition to critical press and a hostility to political opposition in general. The same is true of his economic policies: the austerity of his second term was a consequence of his profligacy in his first term for instance, and changing those policies requires a POD in 1946.
Here's another thing I just found: Arturo Illia, who IOTL was president from 1963 to 1966, ran for governor of Córdoba in 1951 and lost by around 9 points, a relatively narrow margin considering the national Peronist landslide. What could've happened if he won? Could the opposition (or at least the UCR) rally to him as a potential presidential candidate instead of agitating for and planning a coup?
Perón was deposed because of military opposition, his civilian opposition was already thoroughly neutered and reduced to desperate resistance as their leaders were jailed, murdered or exiled. If Perón's overthrow is prevented, the UCR candidate in 1957 would likely have been Balbín, who was the de facto leader of the opposition already.

At any rate, I can think of two ways to prevent Perón's overthrow: there was a military insurrection earlier in the year which failed, and Perón could purge the general staff in response which would make the second insurrection more difficult and less likely to occur; alternatively, he could have refused to resign and fought back, which would likely have lead to a civil war - and it's a shame that Maverick's TL (La Larga y Oscura Noche) was purged from the site when he decided to leave the forum, since it covered this very topic and was one of the best (and for a while one of the few) South American timelines here.

There's actually a good chance that Perón or a candidate of his choosing would lose in 1957: his popularity would continue to decline as the economy worsens, and without the 1955 coup, the 1956 split in the UCR (which would lead to Frondizi's creation of the UCR-I and his subsequent endorsement by Perón) might be butterflied away. Balbín-Frondizi is the likely opposition ticket in the next election.
 
Some of the things that have to change for Perón to not face a coup (his actual deposition in said coup is a separate issue) are too intrinsically tied to both his personal beliefs and his party's ideology; his closure of La Prensa for example isn't something that can be changed without fundamentally altering what that early peronism was, which included an opposition to critical press and a hostility to political opposition in general. The same is true of his economic policies: the austerity of his second term was a consequence of his profligacy in his first term for instance, and changing those policies requires a POD in 1946.

Perón was deposed because of military opposition, his civilian opposition was already thoroughly neutered and reduced to desperate resistance as their leaders were jailed, murdered or exiled. If Perón's overthrow is prevented, the UCR candidate in 1957 would likely have been Balbín, who was the de facto leader of the opposition already.

At any rate, I can think of two ways to prevent Perón's overthrow: there was a military insurrection earlier in the year which failed, and Perón could purge the general staff in response which would make the second insurrection more difficult and less likely to occur; alternatively, he could have refused to resign and fought back, which would likely have lead to a civil war - and it's a shame that Maverick's TL (La Larga y Oscura Noche) was purged from the site when he decided to leave the forum, since it covered this very topic and was one of the best (and for a while one of the few) South American timelines here.

There's actually a good chance that Perón or a candidate of his choosing would lose in 1957: his popularity would continue to decline as the economy worsens, and without the 1955 coup, the 1956 split in the UCR (which would lead to Frondizi's creation of the UCR-I and his subsequent endorsement by Perón) might be butterflied away. Balbín-Frondizi is the likely opposition ticket in the next election.
How would Balbín have been as a president? I could see Illia being an even better president than IOTL if he became governor of Córdoba in 1951 and was the UCR national candidate six years later, since he'd have previous executive experience.

What Peronist faction had the man's favor before his overthrow and exile? By the time he returned he had José López Rega 🤮 as one of his main allies while left-wingers like Cámpora were sidelined.
 
Last edited:
How would Balbín have been as a president? I could see Illia being an even better president than IOTL if he became governor of Córdoba in 1951 and was the UCR national candidate six years later, since he'd have previous executive experience.
Hard to say, anyone elected in 1957 would have had some difficult righting the ship, and Balbín was never anywhere near an executive position for us to be able to glean what kind of administration he might have lead. But both the people who would serve in Frondizi's cabinet and those who would serve in Illia's would be available to form a cabinet, which means he has some pretty significant talent at his disposal (Illia's presidency was transformative, and it's a tragedy that it was cut short; he managed an incredible amount of progress in just 3 years).

Another butterfly in the UCR is Amadeo Sabattini's continued relevance in a scenario where the party doesn't split; tbh, I'm torn on whether or not a split wouldn't still happen, or whether the 1946-51 realignment (which saw groups like FORJA leaving the UCR and joining the Labour/Peronist party) already constituted the extent of the splitting in the party.
What Peronist faction had the man's favor before his overthrow and exile? By the time he returned he had José López Rega (🤮) as one of his main allies while left-wingers like Cámpora were sidelined.
He did the equivalent of leaving William Cooke on read when Cooke and his wife begged him to move to Cuba. Perón's sympathies were always firmly in the right wing of his party, although it's important to consider that Perón was never the type of politician to really countenance "succession", as evidenced by the fact that the biggest names that I could come up with - Bramuglia, founder of the main neo-peronist party UP and Frigerio, engineer of the Perón/Frondizi endorsement - had broken with Perón by 1955. I'm relatively certain that in the absence of his overthrow and exile, Perón would absolutely, definitely run again with Rear Admiral Alberto Teisaire as his running mate. In the absence of the 1955 overthrow, the Peronist party might split before 1957.
 
He did the equivalent of leaving William Cooke on read when Cooke and his wife begged him to move to Cuba. Perón's sympathies were always firmly in the right wing of his party, although it's important to consider that Perón was never the type of politician to really countenance "succession", as evidenced by the fact that the biggest names that I could come up with - Bramuglia, founder of the main neo-peronist party UP and Frigerio, engineer of the Perón/Frondizi endorsement - had broken with Perón by 1955. I'm relatively certain that in the absence of his overthrow and exile, Perón would absolutely, definitely run again with Rear Admiral Alberto Teisaire as his running mate. In the absence of the 1955 overthrow, the Peronist party might split before 1957.
Heh, it would be funny if Peronism ends up seen as a thoroughly conservative ideology (rather than the mess it is today) while more leftist members, or at least the groups that supported them, such as trade unions and the like, went/returned to UCR. With Perón not becoming a martyr and his popularity on the decline, maybe such a move wouldn't be political suicide, especially considering Hortensio Quijano, his first vice president, used to belong to said party.

Wait, are you saying Perón would've run for a third consecutive term? That would be nasty.
 
Last edited:
Heh, it would be funny if Peronism ends up seen as a thoroughly conservative ideology (rather than the mess it is today) while more leftist members, or at least the groups that supported them, such as trade unions and the like, went/returned to UCR. With Perón not becoming a martyr and his popularity on the decline, maybe such a move wouldn't be political suicide, especially considering Hortensio Quijano, his first vice president, used to belong to said party.
I suspect peronism would still resist easy categorization even in the absence of the 1955 coup; I'm struggling to come up with analogies that aren't a bit tinged by my own biases, but a good example of what peronism might become long term is something like chavismo's explosion into a constellation of parties as the egos fail to coexist under a single leadership long term.

I think a more likely outcome would be the Peronist party itself transitioning towards a socially conservative/economically progressive party, with a Labour Party splitting off (lead by Cipriano Reyes like IOTL) and representing its left wing.
Wait, are you saying Perón would've run for a third consecutive term? That would be nasty.
It would, and I can't think of any reason why Perón wouldn't do it. He actively resisted efforts by his erstwhile supporters to consolidate the peronist movement independent of his leadership, and even in 1973 - knowing that he was on his last legs! - he ran again, and picked an ego-boosting running mate instead of someone who could actually take his place in the event of his imminent death.
 
I suspect peronism would still resist easy categorization even in the absence of the 1955 coup; I'm struggling to come up with analogies that aren't a bit tinged by my own biases, but a good example of what peronism might become long term is something like chavismo's explosion into a constellation of parties as the egos fail to coexist under a single leadership long term.

I think a more likely outcome would be the Peronist party itself transitioning towards a socially conservative/economically progressive party, with a Labour Party splitting off (lead by Cipriano Reyes like IOTL) and representing its left wing.

It would, and I can't think of any reason why Perón wouldn't do it. He actively resisted efforts by his erstwhile supporters to consolidate the peronist movement independent of his leadership, and even in 1973 - knowing that he was on his last legs! - he ran again, and picked an ego-boosting running mate instead of someone who could actually take his place in the event of his imminent death.
I could see him trying to run only to decline because of the threat of an imminent military coup, since this could be too much even for his supporters there. Could this hypothetical Labour Party support the UCR, if not in the election then in government?
 
Last edited:
I could see him trying to run only to decline because of the threat of an imminent military coup, since this could be too much even for his supporters there. Could this hypothetical Labour Party support the UCR, if not in the election then in government?
If there's no coup (or failed coup) in 1955, the threat of a coup in 1957 is just not enough for him not to run. Neither his ego nor his ideology could allow for anyone but him to lead the movement he created, and if he's still in the country and eligible to run, he will.

I think the Labour Party would - like a few of the peronist splinter parties in the 1960s and 70s - stay in the peronist orbit in the short- and medium-term, representing its left wing but more or less pushed out of the Peronist party proper by its verticalism and social conservatism.
 
Could the Justicialista car be more successful if the project is continuously supported by the state, instead of being abandoned after Perón's overthrow?
There are two fundamental problems with it: it was an inherently political and partisan project, and was a personal pet project of Perón as opposed to a coherent automotive industry project. If the goal is a surviving, "domestic" automobile brand, SIAM Di Tella would create its own car line a few years after the Justicialista was discontinued for example.
 
There are two fundamental problems with it: it was an inherently political and partisan project, and was a personal pet project of Perón as opposed to a coherent automotive industry project. If the goal is a surviving, "domestic" automobile brand, SIAM Di Tella would create its own car line a few years after the Justicialista was discontinued for example.
So it'd be discontinued the moment Perón was out of power?
 
Here's another thing I just found: Arturo Illia, who IOTL was president from 1963 to 1966, ran for governor of Córdoba in 1951 and lost by around 9 points, a relatively narrow margin considering the national Peronist landslide. What if he won? Could the opposition (or at least the UCR) rally to him as a potential presidential candidate instead of agitating for and planning a coup? Assuming the president doesn't try to intervene and remove him by force, which would make things even worse (he was allowed to do that by the constitution, right? I have no idea).
The 1853 constitution allows Congress to intervene a province, which removes the governor and replaces him with an appointment from the national government. It was used a lot prior to 1976. I don't know if the 1949 constitution had similar or different provisions.

If Peron avoids a coup, either by purging the military or by letting the opposition believe they had a chance to win elections, he'll always run for president himself and wouldn't let anyone in his party grow to leadership.
The economic situation was going to improve. The Western world was under the 30 "glorious" years of post war capitalism. Maybe people end up fed up with him after a while and he looses in the 1960s.
 
Top