Political Culture and Democracy in Latin America
In the chapter on ‘The People’s Verdict,” the authors discuss the importance of the political culture with respect to democracy. In many cases in Latin America, the culture is not adequate for democracies to thrive. This includes social class, geographic location, political institutions, and who is currently in power. Public opinion has recently given an insight into the beliefs of Latin Americans: 58% of those in a 2013 survey said they were strongly committed to democracy with lesser percentages saying that either authoritarianism is acceptable in some cases or saying that “for people like me, it doesn’t matter.” The second choice regarding authoritarianism has many historical overtones. Up to the 1980s, authoritarianism was widely prevalent and a strong military rule has remained a strong force largely up until the last decade. Moreover, the third option of democracy not even mattering greatly supports the author’s point on culture being salient.
Democracy is not created in a vacuum. Strong institutions (which Latin Americans surveyed don’t trust) are needed. The strongest institution remains the demos themselves. In places where there is a history of democracy, there exists a fervent accountability of the demos. When a large minority do not think it even matters, that institution and the credibility of all those created subsequently are in doubt.
Social class is also a key factor regarding the study of democracy and its longevity. The wealthier classes are all more supporting according to polls with the lower and middle classes being less convinced of democracy and its consequential institutions. There often exists the tendency of the lower and working classes to support more authoritarian leaders such as Correra, Fujimori, or Chevez. Regardless of the lack of democratic rights, a large portion of the populace remains convinced by charisma and fast moving government. Moving forward, this once again links development to democracy and that conversation we have previously had in this course repeats. While the link is not a direct causality, the stability of development and a strong economy strengthens the overall bureaucracy and emboldens the demos to actually care.
In international political theory, constructivism is the logic that states that the ideas of a state matter, and it is in fact how these ideas interact with each that is crucial to understanding International Relations and state interactions. Currently, democracy is certainly the biggest idea shown, but it is not the solidified, unanimous idea–rather, amongst many others. One of the most important theories along side of this is the Democratic Peace Theory which states that well-established stable democracies do not go to war with other well-established stable democracies. The role of democracy and regional stability remains critical.
Once again, we must be careful about the distinction between liberalism and the exclusive western version of liberalism. Democracy (or capitalistic policies for growth) do not follow a one size fits all model. What works for Washington or Brussels was not the chosen model for Hong Kong or Taiwan, nor may it need be for Latin American countries as they progress in the decades to come.
To conclude, the impact of the domestic culture on the outcome for democracy cannot be understated. Unlike authoritarianism, democracy needs a supporting culture and institutions around it. As the chapter and reading show, there is still a long way to go.
I disagree with this chapter of the “People’s Verdict” for a few reasons. For one, democracy in Latin America may have less than favorable results for other reasons than just issues with culture. For example, people may not favor democracy because it is naturally an ineffeficient way of governance given the many checks and balances and procedures that are in place. In contrast, people who have lived under authoritarian rule may prefer a government that can more quickly make decisions due to the lack of accountability. Furthermore, it is unfair to measure Latin America’s current status of democracy against other countries like America or Europe, because they have had decades if not centuries of different types of rule. For instance, France has progressed from chiefdoms, to monarchies, revolution, back to a monarchy and then to democracy. Latin America should be afforded the time to also make adjustments, and even setbacks, before achieving a democracy that fits for each country’s conditions.
I agree with you that culture plays a role in the outcome for democracy, to what extent is more than likely impossible to say for certain. I do think that if there is an anti United States or anti capitalism culture than that nation is more likely to become an authoritarian or socialist regime. However as you touched on in your post wealth and the effectiveness of the institutions in place play a bigger role than culture, although a nation may be more anti US if they are receiving benefits from democracy than they will be okay with democracy as a type of government. However I believe that Latin American nations are in danger of entering the fallacy of electoralism where counties value elections over institutions that hold individuals accountable and in return fall into a low-level trap where the lack of responsiveness of the government is met by a lack of expectations by the people and in that case authoritarianism may be a better alternative.