There is debate about whether his rule can correctly be labelled as populist. Following Agustin Cueva, several authors have argued that in the midst of a hegemonic crisis Velasco rose to power on the votes of the coastal sub-proletariat, peasants who had migrated to urban centres as the cacao industry dwindled. The charismatic figure of Velasco, according to this view, emotionally captured the masses with promises of redemption. Others, among them Rafael Quintero, argue that the entrenched landowning elite was instrumental for Velasco's victory (at least in the 1930s), as the Coastal elite had been weakened by the end of the cacao boom.Carlos De la Torre, "Populism and democracy: political discourses and cultures in contemporary Ecuador." Latin American Perspectives 24.3 (1997): 12-24. online
