Why Economic Inequality and Low Economic Growth Might Threaten Democracy?

Cordova and Seligson’s (2010) studies prove that low economic development and low economic growth, and high economic inequality, can escalate the democratic vulnerabilities in Latin America and the Caribbean. However, these economic conditions affect people differently at the individual level. To point out, the young and poor citizens are the ones who are the most vulnerable to some anti-democratic government system. The AmericasBarometer evidence also indicates that an economic decline can impact democratic improvement in Latin America and the Caribbean. Moreover, hard economic times and negative evaluations on a country’s economy may impact individuals support towards democracy negatively. For example, citizens will lose their political legitimacies of their government and later want a democracy reform. Even worse, the young and the poor individuals tend not to want democracy and participate in violence as they are becoming poorer.

In addition, Cordova and Seligson (2010) state that attitudes do matter for political behavior. According to the authors’ analysis, people who express high approval to participate in violent actions are most likely to display their likelihood of taking part in a protest. Also, the falling economic growth and development in Latin America and the Caribbean lead to weak support in the political system, which turns into high violent participation. However, Cordova and Seligson later found that the increase of the violent political action is mainly caused by the individual characteristics, not by some economic factors. I agree with the authors because I believe that when a government failed to manage its country’s economy, people will start losing their legitimacy towards the government. Therefore, income inequality and low economic growth can threaten democracy because it can raise numerous social problems and the decline of well-being and happiness. People who are experiencing economic pains from democracy may also choose violence or run to authoritarianism as they are losing legitimacy from their government. So, why do nothing and be poor and wait for the government to do something when they have failed the economy, when you have the option to participate in violence and perhaps gain some incentives?

Furthermore, Cordova and Seligson (2010) claimed that the young people and the poor are more likely to participate in a violent action. The authors’ findings show that young individuals among the ages of 16 and 30 are more likely to approve violent actions than the older populations. I believe that this is because the younger populations distrust democracy and their governments as democracy may have mistreated them. Perhaps, the young individuals decide to give up on democracy because it fails to provide them with better jobs or life opportunities. I also think that the high approval of violent participation by the younger crowds has to do with low education that can be tied together with poverty, as well as other factors such as their history of having aggressive behaviors or having anger issues.

Overall, a decrease in the economic growth, low economic development, and high-income gap in Latin America and the Caribbean can lead to low support in a political system, because individuals are distrusting their governments. If the government cannot survive difficult economic times, its citizens will show a great disappointment, and eventually, approve or seek violence. Additionally, an increase in the political violent participation is not necessarily caused by an economic factor. Instead, it has to do with the individuals’ characteristics. Finally, the young people at the age ranging from 16 to 30 year olds tend to have a high approval of violence as these people have the disappointment of their government. Their government had failed to give them hope for the future by not providing the younger individuals higher quality jobs and better life opportunities.