Transitions to Democracy from Authoritarianism

The superiority of a democratic government is something we’re taught from such a young age in the United States. You just sort of grow up believing that the country you are living in is the best one and makes decisions that are in your best interest (and everyone else’s, supposedly), but studying different regions of the world can really alter that perspective. You start to realize that the United States intervened where it had no business intervening and put people into power that had no business being there. We have a superiority complex that drives the world and rides on the justification that we just want democracy for everyone, but is democracy as achievable as it seems?

This is where it becomes important to define democracy, since it can often have some broad interpretations. According to Smith and Sells in Democracy in Latin America, we can define democratic as, “when national leaders acquired or held office as a result of free and fair elections—that is, when there was open competition for support among a substantial portion of the adult population”. What sorts of characteristics of an authoritarian regime might make it difficult to achieve this?

Looking at the example of Costa Rica, democracy seems very achievable for Latin America. The Costa Rican economy is strong with a heavy reliance on ecotourism and the lack of military has seemed to pay off in creating a peaceful nation. While studying in Costa Rica last autumn, many Ticos talked to me about their pride for the government that they have sustained for so many years. They are excited to be a part of a country that sets such a beautiful example. However, Costa Rica’s transition to democracy was much more smooth than most. Following a 44-day civil war, José María Figueres, the interim president at the time, drafted a constitution that established free and fair elections and disbanded the military, resulting in a peaceful nation. It was almost too simple to be true.

Although Costa Rica is an example of smooth success, we have to consider why this cannot be the case for every nation. One idea that Karl addresses in “Dilemmas of Democratizaton in Latin America” is the historically-rooted reliance on repressive agriculture in the region. Countries that had agriculture play a secondary role in their economies had a better chance at success in democracy because there was a lesser presence of a handful of “landowner elites” controlling a large portion of the economy. This suggests that the preexisting economic structure of a nation has a lot to do with the ease of transition from authoritarianism to democracy.

This idea that preexisting structure affects the ease with which a nation can make a large political transition is probably the most important one to look at. Its important to remember that socioeconomic structures might play a role in whether or not the people in a country are willing to make such strong shifts as well. For example, authoritarian regimes are often characterized by a very small and very powerful elite group that holds most of the economic and political control. This is part of what makes a transition to democracy so difficult; you cant just go taking power from the people who have held it for years. Equality isn’t nearly as easy to achieve as it seems, be it race, gender or socioeconomic status.

Guatemala and El Salvador are particularly interesting in that they are both influenced heavily by the landowning elite, which happens to have a strong relationship with the military. Their military, for this reason, is unlikely to tolerate the civil liberties and political competitiveness that are supposed to characterize a democracy. In these cases, the pre-existing structure of the countries will play a huge role in their transition to democracy. Guatemala is holding elections and there have been protests that show citizen interest in change, but according to a New York Times article titled “A Wrong Turn for Guatemalan Democracy” by Anita Isaacs, the transition will prove to be less-than-smooth.

In short, transitioning from an authoritarian government to a democratic one takes a lot of patience and some serious willingness to make changes. Latin America’s history of colonization, oppression and Catholicism (a religion of hierarchy) makes it a difficult case with respect to democracy, though it has proven to be quite resilient in the face of such stress—almost every country has made that transition at one time or another, whether it was successful and complete or not.