The case for corruption as the main source of inequality.
While inequality is inevitable, whether it be social or economic, there are cases where the inequality is too big. Latin America seems to be a region in the world, where inequality is present and in high volumes. Robert Kaufman writes in “The Political Effects of Inequality in Latin America: Some Inconvenient Facts” a good summary of how the political process has affected the inequality in this region. Using Gini coefficients and how they related to democratization, Kaufman shows that inequality is common in Latin America. However, is inequality just because there is no richness? No, in fact one can make the case that corruption is the main source of inequality. This can be furthered seen in the 2012 elections in Mexico.
When the presidential elections were turning the corner in Mexico, there were 3 candidates who could’ve won; Enrique Pena Nieto (PRI), Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador (PRD) and Josefina Vazquez Mota (PAN). The PRI, holding their reputation of being the corrupt party, where eager to get back into power after a 12 year hiatus. What they did to influence voters was smart but disgusting. PRI representatives would go to poor areas in Mexico and offer voters $500 pesos (~US$40) if they would vote for PRI, take a picture of the ballot and show the picture to the representative. If they didn’t have the chance to take the picture they would not get the money, even if they did vote for PRI. This act of corruption to ensure a corrupt president would get in power shows how politicians can use their power to influence the inequality.
Politicians think they are above the law and entitled to many things they are not. This form of economic and social inequality makes the quality and legitimacy of a democracy questionable. By having corrupt politicians and representatives, a democracy could in turn become a non-democracy anymore. Eventually in Mexico PRI won back the presidency, and ever since then there has been many corruption scandals and human rights violations to the impoverished population of Mexico. While corruption is not the only factor in the inequality of certain countries, it certainly does have an effect. So how exactly is inequality seen in these countries? Economic inequality is the most common and most apparent, Latin America has a lot of poverty.
In terms of poverty, there’s always bound to be some sort of poverty. However, it is absolute poverty that makes it inexcusable for the government to overlook it. Poor people around the world, simply want an opportunity. Not every poor person would vote for higher taxes on the rich and none for them, although some would. However, people at the top of the totem pole will rarely look down and try to help those below them. Due to their “elite” status, they feel untouchable and they can do whatever they want to make themselves better off without a care for those who truly need it.
Corruption is a key contributor to the inequality one sees in Latin America.
I agree that corruption is the biggest factor in Latin American inequality. A big problem is that people seem to be complacent with the corruption, as they continue to vote for these corrupt parties. I think there is also the aspect of familiarity with the party. People have known the PRI since they were born and many are just programmed to vote for them. They would rather stick with what they know, rather than go with the unknown, even if that might be better. This is what leads to the politicians feeling like they can do anything. They have the power from the people and until that changes, the corruption won’t change
I completely agree with you when you say that “Corruption is a key contributor to the inequality one sees in Latin America.” Besides social and economic corruption, what are some other sources of inequality in Latin America? Would you say that corruption is the most important component of inequality?
I know that in the case of Mexico, a lot of people cannot confide in their government officials or the police force because of the drug trade. Politicians are basically bought off by kingpins because they are offered more than what they make. My personal opinion about politicians is that they are greedy and want money so it makes sense that drug lords are using money as an enticement and politicians are okay with this because they think they’re above the law, as you mentioned.
As long as government leaders allow for this corruption, I think there is very little that can be done to resolve inequality.
I’m interested to know your opinion on a somewhat related matter after reading this piece. What do you think about lobbying in US politics? One could argue, I suppose, that it is akin to the bribery/corruption that you derided. It could be viewed as similar just as an interaction at a higher level rather than at the local voter. It could be seen as those with money using it to influence it in their favor like the PRI paying for votes.
I think lobbying is similar in nature to corruption but it is not nearly as damaging to the society. Corruption in Mexico is extreme and it often leads society worse off than before. Lobbying, while not perfect, in some way helps a targeted group or a social factor. Corruption in Mexico is usually simply a way to get money for personal politicians gain. I would highly recommend you read what Duarte (the former governor of Veracruz did) and how it does not help anyone but himself.
I agree completely that corruption is one of the main contributors to inequality is corruption. Countries such as Mexico, Colombia, and Venezuela continuously face these issues as a majority of government officials, going all the way up to the top of the food chain, have accepted bribes or are working in their own interest rather than the people. It’s also occurring due to the presence of drug trafficking rings throughout Latin America.