guided reading democracy case study latin american democracies

Comparing Latin Democracies

• Diego Abente-Brun

Select your citation format:

The Quality of Democracy in Latin America . Edited by Daniel H. Levine and José E. Molina. Lynne Rienner Publishers, 2011. 299 pp.

W hat does it mean to speak of the “quality” of a country’s democracy, and how can this quality be measured and compared across cases? Since the early 2000s, a number of scholars have been trying to answer these questions. In mid-decade, Daniel Levine and José Molina gathered a distinguished group with the aim of systematically improving upon the existing expert literature. The group’s work focused on Latin America, but wider implications are not far to seek. The fruits of the effort are set forth in the present volume, which may safely be called an indispensable tool for all those interested in democracy’s fate, whether in Latin America or beyond.

The editors open with a pair of chapters that ask in detail what the quality of democracy is and how it can be gauged. To this they add a final chapter that attempts to draw some conclusions. In between are case-study chapters on Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Mexico, Nicaragua, and Venezuela. Each chapter addresses the guiding questions posed by the editors, making the book a truly coherent comparative exercise. A brief review lends itself best to consideration of the general questions rather than the specific findings for each country.

About the Author

Diego Abente-Brun is deputy director of the International Forum for Democratic Studies at the National Endowment for Democracy.

View all work by Diego Abente-Brun

Levine and Molina’s curtain-raising theoretical overview is useful and much needed. They rightly insist on a crucial distinction between the quality of democracy as a political process for making decisions and the quality of the decisions and hence outcomes (as these affect security, prosperity, justice, and so on) that any given democracy actually produces.  [End Page 165]  In doing so, they resist a confusing tendency, visible since the late 1990s, to conflate these two concepts. The sad truth is that a society may be well governed from the procedural-democratic point of view, and yet be ill governed in any number of other, more substantive ways.

A second crucial point has to do with the definition of democracy. Levine and Molina insist on a procedural definition because it alone offers enough analytical precision and portability to make the exercise of comparison meaningful. Lastly, Levine and Molina define the focus of their inquiry as “the level of quality of any specific democracy” as “determined by  the extent  to which citizens can participate in an informed manner in processes of free, fair, and frequent elections; influence the making of political decisions; and hold those who govern accountable” (8, emphasis in original). The quality of democracy is thus a multidimensional continuum.

In operational terms, Levine and Molina posit that democratic quality can be measured along five dimensions: electoral decisions, participation, accountability, responsiveness, and sovereignty. Using these, the editors construct a general “Index of Quality of Democracy” (33). The Index uses data from 2005 or the nearest preceding year for which data were available and lists the seventeen Latin American countries that were considered “electoral democracies” by Freedom House that year. The Index consists of figures running along a 0-to-100 scale (with 100 representing a perfect score) to indicate how well each country did along each of the five dimensions of democratic quality.

According to the Index, Uruguay is the region’s highest-quality procedural democracy with an average score of 71.9, followed by Costa Rica, Chile, Argentina, and Mexico clustering together in the low 60s. Guatemala sits at the bottom with a score of 44.6, well below the 17-country average of 57.3. Eight countries—the five already mentioned plus Panama, the Dominican Republic, and Brazil—rank above that average. The remaining nine countries rank below.

The Index shows not only how the various countries rank, but also the relative strengths and weaknesses of each. For example, most countries do well in terms of electoral decisions and sovereignty, especially insofar as the latter can be gauged by the degree of civilian control over the military (no small consideration in a region with a long history of military coups). Participation (average score, 48.5) is a weak spot, which is surprising given the apparent strength of various social movements across Latin America.

The worst deficit, however, appears in the area of accountability. The average score on this measure is an abysmal 28.6, by far the lowest on any of the five dimensions of democratic quality. Each country’s lowest individual score, moreover, is found in this category, indicating a serious across-the-board democratic deficit. Levine and Molina explain this by noting how the region’s many young democracies, anxious to consolidate  [End Page 166]  and show that they can govern, have bolstered presidential powers even to the point of creating what Guillermo O’Donnell calls “delegative democracies.” The problem is acute, but one wonders how well the obvious solution—strengthening legislatures—will work given the drift toward factionalism and exaggerated pork-barrel politics that is evident in so many of these bodies today.

As persuasive as the volume generally is, some elements of its analytical framework are open to question. In a highly original move, Levine and Molina use the degree to which a country is sovereign as one of the indicators of the quality of its democracy. They gauge sovereignty in part by examining a country’s level of foreign indebtedness. But is such indebtedness really a dimension of the political process, or is it rather a policy outcome that sheds light not on a democracy’s quality, but on its performance?

Another indicator of sovereignty is the degree to which civilian officials control the military. Granted, civilian supremacy is vital to democracy. But if we include it, why not also bring in measures of “stateness” such as governmental control over the national territory, an effective bureaucracy, and significant regulatory capabilities? After all, are these not just as important as civilian supremacy when it comes to determining whether citizens can “influence the making of political decisions”? As Claudio Holzner notes in his chapter on Mexico, “Many of the weaknesses of democratic rule in Mexico do not have their origin in faulty rules of the game, but in institutional weaknesses within the Mexican state that make the implementation of those rules inconsistent, unpredictable, and, in some cases, nonexistent” (106).

The inclusion of Transparency International’s well-known Corruption Perception Index as a measure of horizontal accountability makes sense—corruption plainly affects the ability of institutions to control each other. Yet should not other signs of horizontal accountability or its lack (the presence or absence of effective national comptroller’s or ombudsman’s offices, for instance) be included too? As for vertical accountability, one chosen indicator is the average length of terms in elected office, but as this generally falls within a narrow range of four or five years one wonders how much difference it makes.

A perhaps more serious problem is the failure to include an indicator of the  effective  rule of law. It is one thing to have an  estado de derecho  (a formally law-based state, which every democracy must be), but quite another to live under the true  imperio de la ley  in which equal laws are equally applied as a general occurrence. How can citizens influence political decisions or hold those in positions of power accountable if the laws are applied according to who the plaintiff is? Perhaps one could take a position akin to Holzner’s and see uneven law enforcement as a general symptom of state weakness, but most observers would agree that the enforcement problem is to a large extent linked  [End Page 167]  to corruption, influence peddling, and pervasive bias against the poor and disadvantaged.

Finally, readers may want to take the fine print of some of these rankings with a grain of salt. As noted, Costa Rica (63.4), Chile (63.2), Argentina (62.7), and Mexico (61.3) have nearly identical above-average scores. With regard to the first two this seems quite plausible, but the close proximity to them of Argentina and Mexico is bound to raise eyebrows. Argentina, according to a recent UNDP and OAS study, saw a whopping 382 uses of presidential-decree powers between 2002 and 2007, while Chilean chief executives went the better part of a decade (2000 to 2007) without using such powers once. (In Costa Rica, any presidential decree requires legislative approval within a set period, while in Mexico decrees can only be used for commercial matters and must be approved by Congress in the annual budget law.) Although the compiling of indices may be a necessary task, anomalies such as these underline what a conceptually risky enterprise it remains.

Even taking all the foregoing cautions into account, one may conclude that Levine and Molina have produced a fine piece of scholarship. The theoretical chapters are solid and useful, the country chapters illuminating, and the Index an indispensable tool for comparative analysis and the development of a research agenda that, so far as I know, stands as the only one of its kind. Students of democracy, as well as those active in democratic political life, may regard this conceptually elegant and empirically rigorous volume as essential reading. Both audiences will find it a valuable source of information, debate, and guidance. As Gerardo Munck has said, Levine, Molina, and their contributors have authored a tome that “moves the debate forward,” and indeed substantially so.

Further Reading

Volume 26, Issue 3

Weighing the Asian Model

• Benjamin Reilly

A review of The Nature of Asian Politics by Bruce Gilley.

Volume 21, Issue 1

Why Are There No Arab Democracies?

• Larry Diamond

Democracy has held its own or gained ground in just about every part of the world except for the Arab Middle East. Why has this crucial region remained such infertile…

Volume 12, Issue 4

The OAS in Peru: Room for Improvement

• Cynthia McClintock

Although the OAS helped, sudden public revelations of corruption in Peru were more important. 

The rapidly deteriorating quality of democracy in Latin America

Subscribe to this week in foreign policy, daniel zovatto daniel zovatto former brookings expert, director for latin america and the caribbean - international institute for democracy and electoral assistance @zovatto55.

February 28, 2020

Democracy is facing deep challenges across Latin America today.

On February 16, for instance, municipal elections in the Dominican Republic were suspended due to the failure of electoral ballot machines in more than 80% of polling stations that used them. The failure sparked large protests around the country, where thousands took to the streets to demand explanations and to express their discontent with the Junta Central Electoral (JCE), the Caribbean nation’s electoral body. This has not only left the country in a deep political crisis, but has led citizens to lose trust in democratic institutions.

Another country facing a democratic crisis in the region is El Salvador. On February 9, thousands of Salvadorians gathered outside the country’s legislative assembly as the country faced its most significant constitutional crisis since signing a peace agreement to end the civil war in 1992. The crisis started when President Nayib Bukele called the country’s legislators to an emergency session to approve a $109 million loan for the third phase of his security plan, called the Territorial Control Plan. After legislators rejected the plan, the president called military officers into the chamber. The president of the assembly called the show of force an “ attempted coup ” that threatened the separation of powers in the country and disregarded core democratic institutions.

On January 5, the authoritarian regime of Nicólas Maduro in Venezuela orchestrated what opposition officials called a “parliamentary coup” against Juan Guaidó, with police forces blocking the opposition leader from entering the National Assembly to elect the president of the parliament. This clearly exposes the regime’s strategy to dismantle the last legitimate organ among the country’s constitutional powers.

Finally, there have been violent protests and social movements in Colombia, Ecuador, Bolivia, and Chile.

Related Books

Ted Piccone

February 23, 2016

Richard Feinberg

August 30, 2016

These recent examples show that democracy in Latin America is facing a critical period, as a report from International IDEA — “ The Global State of Democracy 2019: Addressing the Ills, Reviving the Promise ” — details . The report examines the state of democracy globally, observing that while democracy continues to expand, its quality is rapidly deteriorating and threats to democracy are rising. It shows that democracy remains resilient, with a high level of citizen support, while emphasizing that most of the attacks on democracy are not external but internal.

Never in the last four decades has the future of democracy been as threatened as it is today. In general, the four main risks to democracy are: reduced space for civic action, weakened democratic checks and balances, high levels of inequality, and attacks on human rights. In Latin America, in particular, many of these challenges are acute, but overall the picture is mixed.

The state of democracy in Latin America

The research shows a regional outlook with bright spots and shadows, along with diversity among countries when it comes to the quality of democracy.

While some democracies, such as Uruguay and Costa Rica, are among the best in the world, others — for example, Brazil — have experienced democratic erosion in recent years. Haiti, Honduras, Guatemala, Paraguay, Bolivia, and the Dominican Republic, meanwhile, all present different degrees of democratic fragility. Nicaragua is experiencing a serious democratic backsliding, while Venezuela is suffering a total democratic breakdown. These two countries, together with Cuba, are the region’s three authoritarian regimes.

It’s important to identify both the positive trends in Latin American democracies and the main challenges they face.

The most notable positive aspects are:

• In the last 40 years, Latin America made the most significant gains worldwide, becoming the third most democratic region in the world, after North America and Europe.
• The vast majority of the democracies in the region have displayed notable resilience: Only 27% experienced any interruption in these last 40 years.
• Latin America has made major gains in the electoral sphere — indeed, elections are popularly accepted as the only legitimate means of coming to power — and the region has the highest levels of election participation in the world, with a regional average of 67%.
• While much remains to be done, it is the region with the highest percentage of women parliamentarians in the world, with a regional average of 27%. However,  there is currently no female elected Latin American president. In Bolivia, which went through a political crisis after the annulment of presidential elections, Jeanine Añez has been designated as the country’s interim president.

There is a long list of challenges as well, including:

• Four decades after the beginning of the third democratic wave, the region is showing signs of democratic fatigue. According to Latinobarómetro , overall support for democracy fell to 48%, the lowest level in recent years, while indifference between a democratic regime and an authoritarian one climbed from 16% to 28%. Dissatisfaction with democracy increased from 51% to 71% between 2009 and 2018.
• The crisis of representative democracy is worsening. Trust in the legislatures is at a mediocre 21%, whereas trust in political parties has plummeted to an anemic 13%.
• The region still has the highest levels of income inequality in the world: Of the 26 most unequal countries in the world, 15 (58%) are Latin American.
• The region is also in third place, after Africa and the Middle East, on corruption; it has the highest levels of crime and violence in the world; and despite numerous reforms, weak rule of law continues to be an Achilles’ heel of democracy in the region.
• Importantly, approval ratings for the governments have been falling significantly and steadily in the last decade. At the same time, there is a heightened citizen perception that the elites govern to benefit a privileged minority of society.

Overcast times in Latin America:  What should be done?

The year 2020 is expected to see overcast times in Latin America, with conditions equally or even more complex and volatile as in 2019. Political risk consultancy the Eurasia Group names social discontent in the region as one of the top 10 political risks in the world in 2020. Additionally, according to The Economist’s 2020 instability risk map, the most vulnerable countries are, in addition to Venezuela and Haiti, Nicaragua, Guatemala, Brazil, Honduras, Chile, Mexico, and Paraguay.

As it enters the new year and a new decade, therefore, Latin America is marked by “irritated democracies,” characterized by anemic economic growth, citizen frustration, social tensions, discontent with politics, and weak governance. There is significant fear that 2020 will be another challenging year for the governments of Latin America.

Social discontent and instability will continue. The middle class, dissatisfied with the status quo, feels vulnerable and is demanding more social spending by their governments. Such spending, in turn, reduces governments’ ability to implement the adjustment measures that the International Monetary Fund and private investors demand as a condition before delivering fresh loans and/or investments. Moreover, citizens have lost patience, are less tolerant of their governments, are more demanding of their own rights, and are hyper-connected via social networks.

As the International IDEA report stresses, we should “address the weaknesses of democracy and revive its promise” with a renewed agenda that lays the basis for a democracy of a new generation. Such a renovation must be aimed at improving democracy’s quality and resilience, as well as strengthening its institutions. It must seek to empower citizens, recover economic growth, rethink the development model, and adopt a new social contract. The agenda must make it possible to respond not only to current issues — including poverty, inequality, corruption, insecurity, and weak rule of law — but also the new challenges.

Lastly, the current situation of democratic discontent and social convulsion that Latin America is experiencing requires offering democratic solutions to the problems of democracy in order to avoid a dangerous escalation of strong populist rhetoric, which could end up aggravating the complex regional situation. It is not merely enough to have quality and resilient democracies. We must also strive to build a modern and strategic state, better governance, and political leadership committed to democratic values, transparency, a connection to the people, empathy, and the ability to govern the complex societies of the 21st century.

Related Content

Dany Bahar, Felipe Muñoz

December 10, 2019

Richard E. Feinberg

November 26, 2019

February 26, 2019

Foreign Policy

Latin America & the Caribbean

Sophie Rutenbar

February 6, 2024

Pepe Zhang, Otaviano Canuto

September 12, 2023

Vanda Felbab-Brown

July 19, 2023

• Skip to main content
• Keyboard shortcuts for audio player

The Americas

The state of democracy in latin america.

NPR's Michel Martin speaks with Brian Winter, editor-in-chief of Americas Quarterly , about democratic backsliding in Latin America.

Copyright © 2023 NPR. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use and permissions pages at www.npr.org for further information.

NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by an NPR contractor. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio record.

• Subject List
• Take a Tour
• For Authors
• Subscriber Services
• Publications
• African American Studies
• African Studies
• American Literature
• Anthropology
• Architecture Planning and Preservation
• Art History
• Atlantic History
• Biblical Studies
• British and Irish Literature
• Childhood Studies
• Chinese Studies
• Cinema and Media Studies
• Communication
• Criminology
• Environmental Science
• Evolutionary Biology
• International Law
• International Relations
• Islamic Studies
• Jewish Studies
• Latin American Studies
• Latino Studies
• Linguistics
• Literary and Critical Theory
• Medieval Studies
• Military History

Political Science

• Public Health
• Renaissance and Reformation
• Social Work
• Urban Studies
• Victorian Literature
• Browse All Subjects

How to Subscribe

• Free Trials

In This Article Expand or collapse the "in this article" section Democratic Transitions in Latin America

Introduction, foundational works.

• Democracy and Democratization
• Explaining Transitions to Democracy
• Breakdown of Democracy
• The Role of Elites
• The Role of the Armed Forces
• Economic Issues and Democracy
• Electoral Politics
• Institutions and the Process of Democratization
• Social Movements and Citizenship
• Gender and Democratization in Latin America
• Indigenous Movements
• Authoritarian Legacies and the Challenge of Multiculturalism
• Consolidating Democracies in Latin America
• International Dimension of Latin American Democratization
• Comparative Studies
• Central America and the Caribbean

Related Articles Expand or collapse the "related articles" section about

About related articles close popup.

Lorem Ipsum Sit Dolor Amet

Vestibulum ante ipsum primis in faucibus orci luctus et ultrices posuere cubilia Curae; Aliquam ligula odio, euismod ut aliquam et, vestibulum nec risus. Nulla viverra, arcu et iaculis consequat, justo diam ornare tellus, semper ultrices tellus nunc eu tellus.

• Brazilian Foreign Policy
• Cuban Political Development
• Democratization
• Democratization in Central America
• Electoral Change in Latin America
• Electoral Volatility in the New Democracies of Latin America
• Guerrilla Insurgencies in Latin America
• Land Reform in Latin America
• Politics and Policy in Contemporary Argentina
• Regional Integration in Latin America
• Social Movements in Latin America
• Transitional Justice

Other Subject Areas

Forthcoming articles expand or collapse the "forthcoming articles" section.

• Cross-National Surveys of Public Opinion
• Politics of School Reform
• Ratification of the Constitution
• Find more forthcoming articles...
• Export Citations
• Share This Facebook LinkedIn Twitter

Democratic Transitions in Latin America by Reynaldo Yunuen Ortega Ortíz LAST REVIEWED: 29 November 2011 LAST MODIFIED: 29 November 2011 DOI: 10.1093/obo/9780199756223-0015

Since gaining their independence at the beginning of the 19th century, the Latin American states have tried to establish democratic regimes. However, most of these efforts failed during the 19th century, in which dictatorships and oligarchic rule were the norm in the region. In his useful classification of electoral regimes in Latin America, Peter Smith distinguishes among electoral democracies, electoral semi-democracies, oligarchic republicanism, and nondemocracies (see Smith 2005 , cited under Explaining Transitions to Democracy ). Between 1900 and 1930 there were only three electoral democracies that lasted between one and fourteen years: Argentina (1916–1929), Mexico (1911–1913), and Uruguay (1919–1933). Between 1930 and 1975 there were processes of democratization and de-democratization in the whole region. The Latin American cases are a central contradiction to modernization theory, which connected the emergence of democracy with certain economic and social background conditions, such as high per capita income, widespread literacy, and prevalent urban residence. We saw the demise of democratic regimes in the most affluent countries of Latin America: Argentina in 1955, Brazil in 1954 and then again in 1964, Chile in 1973, and Uruguay in 1973. The last twenty years of the 20th century, however. saw important changes in the democratization processes of the region. Most of the nineteen Latin American countries experienced processes of electoral democratization. The literature on democratization in Latin America has followed a tendency in political science to emphasize the role of elites and pacts. In a way, as Nancy Bermeo (see Bermeo 2003 , cited under Breakdown of Democracy ) and Adam Przeworski have argued, the group of the Woodrow Wilson Center (see O’Donnell, et al. 1986 , cited under Foundational Works ) was not only analyzing the democratization process, but wanted to “stop the killings.” The most robust structuralist theory, that of Barrington Moore, Jr., on the origins of democracy, was not that promising. The most recent works on democracy and democratization in Latin America are trying to analyze both structure and agency in the processes of democratization.

Mahoney 2003 distinguishes three major research programs on democracy; see Moore Jr. 1966 on structuralism, O’Donnell, et al. 1986 on bureaucratic authoritarianism, and Linz 1975 on leadership and voluntarism. Linked to that program, I would add Dahl 1971 . That fourth program is closest to the elitist school on democracy, but instead of emphasizing the problem of legitimacy, the scholars using that approach concentrate on procedural democracy, and recently, on rational choice and game theory. Bobbio 1987 and Tilly 2007 synthesize the most important debates around the concept of democracy, democratization, and de-democratization as historical processes. Rustow 1970 developed a strong critique of modernization theory ( Huntington 1991 ) and culturalist theories of democracy and proposed instead a genetic model of democracy.

Bobbio, Norberto. The Future of Democracy: A Defence of the Rules of the Game . Oxford: Polity, 1987.

In this book the political philosopher Norberto Bobbio analyzes the evolution of the concept of democracy and the agenda of democracy as a political system.

Dahl, Robert A. Polyarchy: Participation and Opposition . New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1971.

Addresses the question of what conditions increase or decrease the chances of democratizing hegemonic or nearly hegemonic regimes. Although it does not have a regional approach, it provides a typology of regimes, and most of the literature on Latin American transitions has used its insights to analyze the processes of regime change.

Huntington, Samuel P. The Third Wave: Democratization in the Late Twentieth Century . Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1991.

Many scholars have observed that democracies tend to come in waves; Huntington argues that transitions to democracy usually come in waves and are followed by reversions. There are many factors that explain regime change, and therefore explanations vary.

Linz, Juan J. “Totalitarian and Authoritarian Regimes.” In Handbook of Political Science . Vol. 3. Edited by Nelson Polsby and Fred Greenstein, 175–373. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1975.

In this seminal article, Juan Linz developed his typology of different regimes. In particular, he describes the main characteristics of authoritarian regimes.

Mahoney, James. 2003. “Knowledge Accumulation in Comparative Historical Research: The Case of Democracy and Authoritarianism.” In Comparative Historical Analysis in the Social Sciences . Edited by James Mahoney and Dietrich Rueschmeyer, 131–174. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

This article summarizes the main research agendas dealing with democracy and democratization, based on comparative historical research.

Moore, Barrington, Jr. Social Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy: Lord and Peasant in the Making of the Modern World . Boston: Beacon, 1966.

This book is a classic. Using a structuralist perspective, it shows how different configurations of social coalitions (the peasantry, the landed upper classes, and the bourgeoisie) led to different outcomes: dictatorship or democracy.

O’Donnell, Guillermo, Philippe C. Schmitter, and Laurence Whitehead, eds. Transitions from Authoritarian Rule: Prospects for Democracy . 4 vols. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1986.

This is a classic comparative study of the transitions in Latin America and southern Europe. It includes multiple essays with comparative and case studies of different countries that were part of the “third wave.” It emphasizes the role of elites and pacts in the process of transition from authoritarian rule.

Rustow, Dankwart. “Transitions to Democracy: Toward a Dynamic Model.” Comparative Politics 2.3 (1970): 337–363.

DOI: 10.2307/421307

Rustow develops a dynamic model to analyze the emergence of a democratic regime, criticizing the economic and cultural determinants of previous models.

Tilly, Charles. Democracy . New York: Cambridge University Press, 2007.

This book is concerned with the continual processes of democratization and de-democratization and tries to measure the changes in four dimensions: breadth, equality, protection, and mutually binding consultation.

back to top

Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content on this page. Please subscribe or login .

Oxford Bibliographies Online is available by subscription and perpetual access to institutions. For more information or to contact an Oxford Sales Representative click here .

• About Political Science »
• Meet the Editorial Board »
• Oceania, Gender, Indigenous and Ethnic Political Represent...
• Advanced Democracies, Electoral System Reform in
• Advanced Democracies, Public Opinion and Public Policy in
• Advertising and Election Campaigns in the United States
• Africa, Comparative Politics of
• Africa, Ethnic, Linguistic, Religious, and Regional Minori...
• Africa, Public Opinion in
• Africa, Women’s Political Representation in
• African Development, Politics of
• American Indian Politics
• Ancient Chinese Political Thought
• Arab Spring, The
• Arab-Israel Conflict, The
• Arendt, Hannah
• Argentine Government and Politics
• Aristotle's Political Thought
• Arms Race Modeling
• Asia, Environmental Politics in
• Asia, Water Politics in
• Asian American Mobilization and Political Identities
• Australia and New Zealand, Comparative Politics of
• Authoritarian Regimes, Lawyers in
• Authoritarianism in Russia
• Authoritarianism in the Public
• Authoritarianism in Turkey
• Bicameralism in Stable Democracies
• Big Data in Political Science Research
• Biopolitics and State Regulation of Human Life
• Birthright Citizenship
• Brazilian Political Development
• Brexit, British Politics, and European Integration
• Business-State Relations in Europe
• Campaign Finance in the Era of Super-PACS
• Canadian Foreign Policy
• Canadian Government and Politics
• Candidate Emergence and Recruitment
• Caribbean, Elections and Democracy in the
• Celebrities in US Politics
• Channels of Electoral Representation in Advanced Industria...
• China, Political Economy of
• China's One-Child Policy
• China-Taiwan Relations
• Chinese Communist Party
• Chinese Economic Policy
• Chinese Nationalism
• Civil Society in South Asia
• Civil War in Sub-Saharan Africa
• Civil-Military Relations in Asia
• Class in American Politics
• Climate Change and Politics
• Collective Memory
• Colombian Politics and Government
• Comparative Capitalism Theory
• Comparative Industrial Relations in Europe
• Comparative Political Economy of Resource Extraction
• Comparative Politics of Angola, Mozambique, and Guinea-Bis...
• Comparative Politics of Chile and Uruguay
• Comparative Politics of Federalism
• Comparative Politics of the Middle East and North Africa
• Computational Social Science
• Congress, Defense, and Foreign Policy
• Congressional Reassertion of Authority
• Conservative Litigation Strategies and Groups in US Judici...
• Constitutional Politics in Asia
• Constitutionalism
• Corruption in China
• Cosmopolitan Political Thought
• Crisis of European Integration in Historical Perspective, ...
• Critical Elections, Partisan Realignment, and Long-Term El...
• Critical Theory and the Frankfurt School
• Cycles of Protest
• Democracies, Political Clientelism in
• Democracy and Authoritarianism, Empirical Indicators of
• Democracy and Authoritarianism in Sub-Saharan Africa
• Democracy and Dictatorship in Central Asia
• Democracy and Minority Language Recognition
• Democracy in Latin America
• Democratic Citizenship
• Democratic Consolidation
• Democratic Peace Theory
• Democratic Theory
• Democratization in Africa
• Democratization in Mexico
• Democratization in the Muslim World
• Development of Survey Research
• Diasporas and Politics
• Direct Democracy in the United States
• Dual Citizenship
• East Africa, Politics of
• East and Southeast Asia, Political Party Systems in
• East and Southeast Asia, Women and Politics in
• East Asia, Civil Society and Social Movements in
• Economic Voting
• Effects of the 9/11 Terrorist Attacks on American Public O...
• Egalitarianism
• Election Forecasting
• Election Laws in Democracies
• Election Observation and the Detection of Fraud
• Electoral and Party System Development in Sub-Saharan Afri...
• Electoral Assistance
• Electoral Institutions and Women’s Representation
• Electoral Reform and Voting in the United States
• Electoral Volatility in the New Democracies of Latin Ameri...
• Electronic Voting Systems
• Emotion and Racial Attitudes in Contemporary American Poli...
• Environmental Governance
• Environmental Politics among Advanced Industrial Democraci...
• Ethnic Diasporas and US Foreign Policy
• Ethnic Politics
• Eurasia, Comparative Politics of
• European Parliament, The
• European Social Democracy
• European Union, Politics of the
• Extension of Voting Rights to Emigrants
• Failed and Weak States in Theory and Practice
• Far-Right Parties in Europe
• Federalism in the United States
• Feminist Political Thought
• Field Experiments
• Filibuster, The
• Framing Effects in Political Communication
• Gender and Electoral Politics in the United States
• Gender and International Relations
• Gender and Political Violence
• Gender and Politics in South Asia
• Gender, Behavior, and Representation
• Gender Gap in US Public Opinion
• Gender Stereotypes in Politics
• Genetic Underpinnings of Political Attitudes and Behaviors
• German Politics and Government
• Global Inequality
• Globalization and the Welfare State
• Globalization, Health Crises, and Health Care
• Governance in Africa
• Governmental Responses to Political Corruption
• Gridlock and Divided Government in the U.S.
• Health-Care Politics in the United States
• Historiography of Twentieth-Century American Conservatism,...
• Hobbes’s Political Thought
• Hong Kong, Special Administrative Region of
• Hume’s Political Thought
• Hybrid Regimes
• Ideal Point Estimation
• Identity and Political Behavior
• Ideological Reasoning in Politics
• Illiberal Democracies and Democratic Backsliding
• Immigrant Incorporation in Canada
• Immigrant Incorporation in Western Europe
• Immigration and European Politics
• Immigration and International Relations
• Immigration Politics and Policy in the United States
• Impact of Campaign Contributions on Congressional Behavior...
• Impact of C-SPAN on US Democracy
• Implicit Attitudes in Public Opinion
• Income Dynamics and Politics in North America and Europe
• Income Inequality and Advanced Democracies
• Income Inequality in the United States, The Politics of
• Independent Voters, The Study of
• Indian Democracy
• Indigenous Politics and Representation in Latin America
• Indigenous Rights and Governance in Canada, Australia, and...
• Indonesia, Politics of
• Informal Practices of Accountability in Urban Africa
• Institutional Change in Advanced Democracies
• Institutional Factors Affecting Women’s Political Engageme...
• Intellectual Property in International Relations
• Interest Groups and Inequality in the United States
• Interest Groups in American Politics
• Interethnic Contact and Impact on Attitudes
• International Conflict Management
• International Criminal Justice
• International NGOs
• International Political Economy of Illegal Drugs
• Internet and Politics, The
• Intersectionality in Political Science
• Interstate Border Dispute Management in the Indo-Pacific
• Iran, Political Development of
• Israeli Politics
• Italian Politics and Government
• Judicial Supremacy and National Judicial Review
• Judiciaries and Politics in East Asia
• Kant's Political Thought
• Labor Migration: Dynamics and Politics
• Labor Politics in East Asia
• Latin America, Democratic Transitions in
• Latin America, Electoral Reform in
• Latin America, Environmental Policy and Politics in
• Latin America, Guerrilla Insurgencies in
• Latin America, Social Movements in
• Legal Mobilization
• LGBT Politics in the United States
• Liberal Pluralism
• Libertarianism
• Local Governments in the United States
• Machiavelli’s Political Thought
• Malaysian Politics and Government
• Marx's Political Thought
• Mass Incarceration and US Politics
• Mechanisms of Representation
• Media Effects in Politics
• Media Politics in South Asia
• Mexican Political Development
• Mexican Politics and Government
• Military Government in Latin America, 1959–1990
• Minority Governments
• Minority Political Engagement and Representation in the Un...
• Mixed-Member Electoral Systems
• Modern Dynastic Rule
• Modern Elections and Voting Behavior in Europe
• Motivated Reasoning
• Narrative Analysis
• National Interbranch Politics in the United States
• Nationalism
• NATO, Politics of
• Negative Campaigning
• Neoclassical Realism
• New Institutionalism Revisited, The
• Nigerian Politics and Government
• North America, Comparative Politics of
• Oil, Politics of
• Online Public Opinion Polling
• Organized Criminal Syndicates and Governance in Mexico and...
• Origins and Impact of Proportional Representation, The
• Outcomes of Social Movements and Protest Activities
• Partisan and Nonpartisan Theories of Organization in the U...
• Partisan Polarization in the US Congress
• Partisan Polarization in the US Electorate
• Party Networks
• Party System Institutionalization in Democracies
• Peace Operations
• Personality and Politics
• Personalization of Politics
• Philippine Politics and Government
• Plato’s Political Thought
• Policy Feedback
• Policy Responsiveness to Public Opinion
• Political Ambition
• Political Economy of Financial Regulation in Advanced Ind...
• Political Economy of India
• Political Economy of Taxation, The
• Political Geography in American Politics
• Political Humor and Its Effects
• Political Institutions and the Policymaking Process in Lat...
• Political Obligation
• Political Participation and Representation, Black
• Political Parties and Electoral Politics of Japan
• Political Roles and Activities of Former Presidents and Pr...
• Political Thought, Hegel's
• Political Thought of the American Founders, The
• Politics and Government, BeNeLux
• Politics, Gender Quotas in
• Politics of Anti-Americanism
• Politics of Class Formation
• Politics of Disaster Prevention and Management
• Politics of Ethnic Identity in China
• Politics of Financial Crises
• Politics of Foreign Direct Investment in South Asia
• Politics of Higher Education in the U.S.
• Politics of Internal Conquest in the United States and Can...
• Politics of Japan
• Politics of Natural Disasters, The
• Politics of North Korea
• Politics of Science and Technology
• Politics of South Africa
• Politics of Southern Africa
• Politics of the American South
• Politics of the Philippines: From Rizal to Duterte
• Politics of the US-Mexico Border
• Populism in Latin America
• Positive and Negative Partisanship
• Postcolonial Political Theory
• Postcolonialism and International Relations
• Post-Communist Democratization
• Preferential Trade Agreements, Politics of
• Presidential Candidate Selection in Comparative Perspectiv...
• Presidential Persuasion and Public Opinion
• Presidential Primaries and Caucuses
• Private Governance
• Protest Participation
• Public Opinion in Affluent  Democracies
• Public Opinion in Europe toward the European Union
• Public Opinion in New Democracies and Developing Nations
• Public Opinion on Immigration
• Public Opinion toward the Environment and Climate Change i...
• Public Presidency, US Elections, and the Permanent Campaig...
• Qualitative Methods, The Renewal of
• Race in American Political Thought
• Racial and Ethnic Descriptive Representation in the United...
• Recruitment and Selection for Elected Office
• Redistricting and Electoral Competition in American Politi...
• Referendums and Direct Democracy
• Regime Transitions and Variation in Post-Communist Europe
• Regional Integration
• Regional Security
• Regulating Food Production
• Religion and Politics in Latin America
• Religion in American Political Thought
• Religion in Contemporary Political Thought
• Religion, Politics, and Civic Engagement in the United Sta...
• Republicanism
• Rousseau’s Political Thought
• Rule of Law
• Russia and the West
• Science and Democracy
• Science and Social Movements
• Secession and Secessionist Movements
• Semi-Presidential Systems
• Social Networks, Mass Publics, and Democratic Politics
• Social Policy and Immigrant Integration
• South Asian Political Thought
• South Korea, Politics of
• Southeast Asia, International Relations in
• Southeast Asian Politics
• Spanish Politics and Government
• Spectacle, The
• Sport and Politics
• State Building in Sub-Saharan Africa
• State Formation
• State, The Nature of the
• State-Society Relations in South Asia
• Stereotypes in Political Reasoning
• Supreme Court and Public Opinion
• Supreme Court of the United States, The
• Systemic Theories of International Politics
• Taiwan, Politics of
• Tea Party, The
• Thailand, Politics of
• The Crisis of European Integration in Historical Perspecti...
• The New Right in American Political Thought
• The Politics of Parenthood: Attitudes, Behavior, Policy, a...
• The Politics of Waste and Social Inequalities in Indian Ci...
• Third-Party Politics in the United States
• Tocqueville’s Political Thought
• Transboundary Pollution
• Transnational Private Regulation
• Trust in Latin American Governing Institutions
• Turkey, Political Development of
• US Military Bases Abroad
• US Politics, Neoliberalism in
• US Presidency, The
• US Presidential Campaigns and Their Impact
• Venezuela, The Path Toward Authoritarianism in
• Voter Support for Women Candidates
• Voter Turnout
• Voter Turnout Field Experiments
• Voting Technology and Election Administration in the Unite...
• War, Factors Influencing Popular Support for
• Welfare State Development
• Welfare State Development in Latin America
• Welfare State Development in Western Europe
• West Africa, Politics of
• White Identity Politics
• Women and Conflict Studies
• Women’s Inclusion in Executive Cabinets
• Women’s Legal and Constitutional Rights
• Women’s Political Activism and Civic Engagement in Latin A...
• Women’s Representation in Governmental Office in Latin Ame...
• Women’s Representation in the Middle East and North Africa
• Workers’ Politics in China
• Youth and Generational Differences in US Politics
• Privacy Policy
• Cookie Policy
• Legal Notice
• Accessibility

Powered by:

• [66.249.64.20|185.66.14.133]
• 185.66.14.133

The Dialogue Leadership for the Americas

Search Search

The Challenges Facing Democracy in Latin America: How to Govern Better

Jun 22 2017

Lecture given on receiving the Guillermo O´Donnell Democracy Award and Lectureship 2017, of the Latin American Studies Association (LASA)

LASA Congress, Lima, June 29, 2017

Versión en español aquí  

I am grateful for the honor of receiving this award that bears the illustrious name of Guillermo O' Donnell.  My words of gratitude for all those who decided to bestow this award on me; I note in particular Gabriela Ippolito, who has displayed the persistence and commitment to continue and to disseminate Guillermo’s foundational work. I take it as recognition of so many thousands of Latin Americans who have struggled in times of dictatorship and are devoted now to improving and consolidating democracy.

Politicians and political scientists

I admire the magnitude of Guillermo’s scientific and political contribution. One of his virtues was serving as a bridge between political science and political action. I also admire his human qualities. When we would talk, I did not feel as though I was talking with an intellectual who listened to my interpretations with an air of superiority, but with a person attentive to the facts and to the dilemmas, and with profound respect for those who were engaged in political action. Based on my own political experience I wish to highlight the importance of close collaboration between political scientists and political actors. I learned that the first require becoming familiar with the complexities, subtleties, and uncertainties of political action, and the second need to have rigorous frameworks for analysis and interpretation. This link is weak, perhaps weaker than before. Encouraging such joint work would be a contribution to thinking and action on behalf of democracy in Latin America. LASA is a privileged space for strengthening this nexus.

The value of testimony

Testimony helps to illuminate the past and therefore to learn from history. I wish to start by sharing some lessons that I have learned during my political life. Why did I get into politics? I confess that I never thought that democracy would collapse in Chile, nor had I imagined the great tragedy that ensued. Instead, I imagined, like many of my generation, that democracy was like the Andean range, unmovable. The facts showed me that democracy is like a garden, requiring day-to-day attention.

The paths that our lives took depended on historical circumstances; it was not a heroic decision. There was one moment, during the transfer of a group of ministers, senators, and deputies from Santiago to the dictatorship’s concentration camp on Dawson Island, when I was convinced that we were going to be shot. Your whole life comes together in an instant. At this very moment, I decided to devote my life to recuperate freedom and restore democracy in my country. I see that the same thing is happening today in Venezuela, when so many persons have turned to public action, risking their freedom and even their lives. I have also seen friends from the United States ready and willing to set aside their usual activities to organize to defend their democratic values. Circumstances end up guiding those who have this vocation.

I was held at three concentration camps for more than one year; the key was to survive. Then I was expelled and I lived in exile for 10 years, barred from returning to the country. Many suffered much more than I did, thousands were disappeared, killed, tortured, imprisoned and exiled, but most maintained their resolve to fight. This is attested to by trade union leaders, mothers, and relatives of persons detained and disappeared, who have not let up in their efforts to demand justice and truth. During those years, I learned another lesson:  If you allow yourself to sink into the justified bitterness and let your spirit to become contaminated with a negative animus, you cannot persuade and help mobilize others to build a better society. Therefore, the task was to build a new political and social force, and to battle for a better world, in liberty, without dictatorship.

Memory and the Future

Memory is essential for building a better future. It must endure beyond the life span of those who experienced such tragic experiences. Oral transmission, the family, or the party are not enough. It is essential to record testimonies and keep memory alive through writing, poems, music, films, works of architecture, and museums. Oblivion brings despair. Knowing the truth is liberating and it helps to ensure that history is not biased in favor of the victors, for that would end up justifying the horrors and repeating the mistakes. I have learned to take historians very seriously.

I also understood that you do not learn from history if you only blame others. It is not enough to condemn the dictatorships; we must ask ourselves how and why we ended up with a dictatorship. Shortly after getting out of prison, by then in the United States, I wrote the book El Gobierno de Allende. Chile 1970-73. [1] Was Allende´s program viable? No doubt, the lessons of the tragic experience of the Unidad Popular were decisive for the transition strategy led by the Concertación de Partidos por la Democracia and for sustaining the five center-left administrations from 1989 to date.

The harsh experiences of the peoples of Latin America yield lessons that are also useful today for improving what we have and offering valuable data to the citizens of so many countries that still live under authoritarianism. 

Democratic dilemmas today

I will refer to two issues, future transitions and the new challenges facing today’s democracies.

Transitions to democracy continue to be relevant in many countries. When many of us participated in transition processes, we thought that each situation was unique and we hardly asked ourselves about others’ experiences. It would have been so useful to learn about them! Transitions are not processes of the past; they are latent in many nations today. While each situation is specific and inimitable, there are some recurrent characteristics. We learned this with Professor Abraham Lowenthal when we undertook an extensive and intense effort to draw out the lessons of nine countries by interviewing 13 presidents who led them. In the book Democratic Transitions , entrusted to us by the International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance (IDEA), translated into six languages, we dared to identify 10 recurrent characteristics. [2]

The transition from authoritarianism to democracy is still a crucial task, just as the risks persist of reversion to hybrid systems that are born of elections yet become authoritarian. Global circumstances have changed substantially for the new transitions. International conditions are more propitious for promoting free elections and guaranteeing respect for human rights than in the times of the Cold War. The international organizations – and specifically the International Criminal Court – serve to inhibit repression by authoritarian governments. Yet many countries that experience authoritarianism have unfavorable internal conditions: they may not have a prior history of democratic practices; regional and tribal struggles and religious disputes come into play; and the processes of change are becoming ever more complex. Therefore, the new realities demand new analyses and innovative approaches.

The new challenges to democracy

Numerous democracies are entering complex and unknown terrain. Many argue that the number of inhabitants living under democracies has stagnated or even fallen in recent years; and that the magnitude of the challenges to come will create risks of a democratic backsliding and even a return to authoritarianism. Fear and uncertainty encourage extreme rightwing positions that see nationalism and isolation as the solution to the problems. In every region, there is a growing debate around democratic resilience and democratic governance. But which phenomena are global and which are national?  How much is there in common?

National governance and global ungovernability

It is evident that global phenomena will increasingly affect national political processes. The exponential explosion of modern communication technologies, education, and urbanization substantially bolster citizens’ capacity for action. New expectations emerge.  A variety of social movements, civil society organizations, companies and individuals acquire enough power to influence decision-making. There is a dispersion of power. None has the hegemony to impose its will alone.

A recent study carried out by the National Intelligence Council (NIC) of the United States called Paradox of Progress , looking prospectively to 2035, warns that global ungovernability may be the greatest threat. [3] In its three scenarios, it describes a more volatile world with systemic changes whose consequences will surpass the capacity of the states and the international organizations. It foresees the influence of multiple actors and a dispersion of power that will create more risks. It asks three overarching questions. First: How to manage expectations in societies with empowered citizens and rapidly changing economies? Second: How can one negotiate an architecture of collaboration and competition among the major state powers, organized groups, and individuals with the capacity to influence? Third: How can one anticipate the impacts of climate change and disruptive technologies to act on time? In its three scenarios (Islands, Orbits, and Communities), the NIC emphasizes the risks of ungovernability due to the limited operational capacity of the states in the face of increasingly complex societies.

These findings warn us of the need to increase Latin America’s global forecast capacity, and to improve the design of strategies and national policies

Discern the causes of democratic tensions in order to govern better

Numerous articles and debates in developed countries warn of new challenges to democracy. These reflections are useful, yet we should recognize that the causes of the phenomenon in those countries are different from the causes in the Latin American ones. Thus, for example, whereas in Europe fears abound over the exponential demographic imbalance between Europe and Africa, or over the differences in religious cultures, as between the West and Islam, in Latin America these are not relevant factors. The consequences of immigration and terrorism in Europe and the United States, awakening isolationist and xenophobia reactions, are not as compelling in our region either.

These distinctions are essential for a sound assessment, which is an essential requirement for improving government programs in Latin America. In the recent past, numerous Latin American nations have made progress valuing democracy, holding elections, protecting human rights, achieving independence of the judicial branch, increasing transparency, improving macroeconomic management, attaining more social inclusion, and protecting the environment. This recounting should give us the confidence that there has been the political capacity in the past to overcome crisis and to improve governance. The question is whether democratic institutions have today the resilience to channel the new and more complex problems.

Three challenges facing Latin American democracy

I will refer to what I consider the three greatest problems, highlighting the reforms that should be pursued to increase the capacity of the state institutions and civil society.

The first challenge is inequality.  According to ECLAC, the reduction in poverty has stagnated at an average of 28% in the last four years, and has begun to climb in several countries. Inequality is also growing. It is not just income inequality; there is also social, territorial, ethnic, and gender discrimination, which is at odds with the new awareness of rights. There will be conservative proposals seeking to resolve this challenge by turning to the market, growth without inclusion, and authoritarian practices. How can we strengthen democracy? Tax reform, education reform, improving the coverage and quality of public services, health, urban development and housing, and citizen security. All should be part of an agenda for an effective democracy that accords priority to social inclusion.

A second challenge is the widening gap between the new demands, expectations, and behaviors that accompany the rapid expansion of the middle classes, and an elitist political system with a fragile state apparatus. Economic, political and other power elites tend to constitute a cartel that acts in several interconnected areas. Citizen control and progressive disarticulation of these elites is a condition for affirming representative democracy. Democratic legitimacy erodes when governments are not capable of expanding political rights and delivering basic public goods to protect the most vulnerable. 

If institutions are not prepared to channel new demands discontent will grow, with disaffection and electoral abstentionism, social mobilization in the streets, and even violence. This challenge requires successfully addressing two vital issues: providing institutional space for citizen participation, and strengthening the operational capacity of the state.

On participation, Guillermo O’Donnell already warned of the exhaustion of delegative democracy, which Rosanvallon calls democracy of authorization. O´Donnell said, “The power regime detests the institutions that serve as checks and balances of the Executive … with the messianic idea that a majority vote gives them the right to do as they see fit.” The deepening of democracy requires the development of complementary forms of participatory democracy, whether through O’Donnell’s “accountability” or Rosanvallon’s “ démocratie d’exercise. ” [4] Relying on electoral participation alone leads to disaffection. There is increasing criticism of “intermittent democracy,” when voting is exercised every four, five, or six years. Citizens do not accept being merely “sovereigns for a day.”

What to propose? First, put in place institutional mechanisms of participation and consultation, locally, regionally, and nationally; install new technological platforms to put out information; form citizen councils to debate relevant issues. Participation contributes to citizen control of the state and, in particular, of the government. Second, approve new laws and regulations and reinforce autonomous bodies to provide transparency, exert control, and apply strong sanctions against corruption. Two actors have played a decisive role combatting corruption: the social media and the attorney generals’ offices that have autonomous prosecutors. Separating money from politics is a major issue to stop the plummeting confidence in political institutions that undermines the legitimacy of democracy. Now more than ever, we need to provide public financing of politics and guarantee its strict oversight.

Third, defend and ensure the separation of powers and increase citizen oversight of the state institutions, and the government. One recent deformation of Latin American democracies has been the trend of constitutional amendments allowing for re-election – and, worse still, allowing for the indefinite re-election – of the president. Fourteen of the 18 Latin American countries (not including Cuba) have adopted provisions that allow for re-election. Therefore, the region has been moving in the opposite direction, concentrating power instead of expanding political participation. Priority should be accorded to institutional reforms, for expanding participation, conducting citizen consultations, and strengthening oversight and transparency.

A third challenge is slow economic growth, unemployment, and social vulnerability. Democracy must be capable of lifting living conditions in a sustained manner. To “accountability” should be added “delivery,” showing palpable results. (Interestingly, neither term has a straightforward translation to Spanish). Social inclusion will require growth, higher productivity, and job creation, especially for youth. Changing the productive structure has become the top priority in almost every country. Albeit at different paces, all should aim to invest more in infrastructure, improving technical education, science, and technology, promote digital development, and strengthen the nexus between technology and natural resources, giving impetus to small and medium enterprises, a culture of entrepreneurship, promoting public-private partnerships and Latin American integration. The goal must be to escape from the so-called middle-income trap. Inclusive and sustainable growth is a necessary condition for advancing democracy.

In sum, the convergence of inclusion, participation, and innovation, with a view to 2030, is the basis for political action to strengthen democracy in Latin America. Attaining the 2030 sustainable development goals should be a priority objective.

Institutional Reforms

Along with citizen participation, priority should be attached to reforming the state apparatus in order to improve its efficacy. Three dimensions need change. The first is preserving public order. Many countries have to confront violence, organized crime, corruption, and the lack of capacity on the part of the police and judicial systems. This is the essential task of the state; when not performed, governability is at serious risk. A second crucial aspect is ensuring the independence of the electoral and judicial authorities, and expanding the capacity for independent oversight. Third, in the economic and social area, the public sector must be endowed with powers and quality human resources to design and implement new policies for inclusion and productive transformation. Performing these tasks requires training leaders with technical knowledge and political skill, improving the quality of public servants, and establishing effective oversight systems.

Strengthening the political parties

The new stage of democratic development in Latin America requires strengthening the political parties and civil society organizations. Most of our countries have a fragile, fragmented, and unstable political party structure. If the State capacity is lagging and social complexity increases, the majorities needed in Parliament to sustain the government may disperse, therefore augmenting the risk of ungovernability

What actions need to be taken?  Parties should better perform three essential functions: elections, governing, and helping organize civil society. Latin American parties usually focus only on the first role. The programmatic function is very limited, and without a program, there is no good government. A sound program is also an antidote to populism. The participatory function is the most relevant in the coming institutional phase.

Strengthening the political parties implies increasing their independence from business interests, building firewalls between politics and money, establishing strong regulations and tough sanctions. It also requires enhancing the quality of the education and training of young leaders, bringing them into the government, the local and regional administrations, social organizations, and election campaigns. The complexity of governing requires experts with political capacity and politicians with technical knowledge. We have plenty of business schools and so few schools of government.

Finally, we need to encourage the formation of networks and associations of political parties in Latin America, to share experiences and take common initiatives. The issues faced and solutions proposed coincide in many respects. When one looks at the press in the region one notes that the problems are similar, the debates touch on many of the same issues, and the political dynamics are alike. Nonetheless, there are no permanent Latin-American political party bodies for joint thinking and action. This is another priority. Personal relations will bring future leaders together and build trust among them, facilitating common action along a convergent path.

A powerful narrative that convenes citizens to build a better society

A political discourse that offers to satisfy specific demands of just certain groups cannot ensure coherent development in any country. Governance requires a collective vision, a sense of a community sharing a single purpose, an equitable social pact, and a common way forward.  

Political programs generally lack a narrative that could bring diverse groups together and reconcile different interests. It is crucial to give collective meaning to each policy proposal. In my country, for over a decade the polls have revealed a dissociation in the Chilean mindset: Most say they are doing well personally and have an optimistic view of the future, while at the same time they say the country is doing poorly. Individualism prevails, along with a certain belief that personal progress does not depend on how society is organized, but on how one brings pressure to bear on those who hold power.

To be forceful, a compelling narrative should always reiterate democratic principles and values: the dignity of persons, freedom of conscience, of expression, of association, holding free elections, respecting human rights, ensuring transparency and direct accountability to citizens, and cultivating tolerance, diversity, and social justice.

The media play a key role in this undertaking. Strengthening democracy requires that the media assume greater responsibility for promoting democratic values, procedures and behaviors for ensuring civilized coexistence. In times of the so-called “post-truth,” the media must see to the rigor and truthfulness of their assertions, and help avoid the polarization of society.

Fear, insecurity, and divisionism are the breeding ground for populism and authoritarianism. Designing an optimistic horizon that encourages hope and confidence is a permanent requirement that should be taken up by democratic-minded persons. A long-term view facilitates strategic agreements and political understandings. The 2030 agenda is one of the great global initiatives for mobilizing society for these purposes. 

Good governance to win democratic legitimacy

Deficient governance weakens democracy. Good governance strengthens it. When the government performs poorly and starts losing popular approval, government leaders and their appointees start looking for scapegoats who they can blame, or intend to cling tightly to an ideological interpretation at odds with reality.  Due to ineptitude, discontent grows and protests spread. Some simplistic analysts quickly conclude that the demands are due to “structural” phenomena or attribute problems to imaginary enemies. In addition, they adopt radical proposals, they tend to control the media and restrict freedoms, when failures are actually the cumulative effect of mismanagement over time. Contemporary Venezuela is one clear example of such a situation.

What requirements are essential for good government?

Some presidents come into government with just a general outlook, without the precision and rigor needed to implement measures and introduce good legislation. It is also very common for top government positions to be filled based on friendship, without considering competence.  Good governance requires improving program design and selecting quality staffs.

It is essential for good governance to form and ensure a majority in the legislature. When the president has no party, or has a weak party, governing becomes a feat, and the ensuing process of attrition degrades the political ambience and discourages citizens. Good government requires institutional formulas that synchronize presidential elections with legislative elections to facilitate the convergence of forces that can form majorities in the Parliament.

The good example in politics

I end these remarks by summarizing a few lessons learned throughout my political life. I think that if we are to strengthen democracy we must prioritize four tasks.

First, perform a sound assessment , with data, with social, cultural, and economic analysis, and with attention to the historical experiences and the world trends that will condition us.

Second, develop a good narrative , which, based on the values that inspire each sector, provides a meaning to the strategic objectives, and leads to consistent programs and viable policies.

Third, have good government , ensure the quality of public sector management, harmonize expectations and promises with real possibilities, select persons who combine political capacity with technical background and deliver results.

A good assessment, a good narrative, and good government are essential.

But there is something more: be a good example . The main asset of a ruler and of a political leader is being an example of consistency in practice, displaying conduct that is at once austere, open, and serious.

Pope Francis’s words are wise:

“I ask you not to underestimate the value of example because it has more strength than a thousand words, a thousand leaflets, a thousand ‘likes,’ a thousand ‘retweets’ and a thousand videos on YouTube. The example of an austere life at the service of one’s neighbor is the best way to promote the common good”. And I would add, the best way to strengthen democracy.

[1] Sergio Bitar, El Gobierno de Allende. Chile 1970-73 , 4th edition, Pehuén Editores, Chile 2017.

[2] See Democratic Transitions. Conversations with World Leaders (Johns Hopkins University Press, 2015) and Transiciones Democráticas. Conversaciones con Líderes Mundiales (Galaxia Gutenberg, Barcelona, 2016).

[3] Global Trends Paradox of Progress (National Intelligence Council, 2017).  www.dni.gov/nic/globaltrends.

[4] Democracia Delegativa , Guillermo O´Donnell et al., editors, Prometeo, Buenos Aires, 2011 .  Le Bon Gouvernement , Pierre Rosanvallon, Editions du Seuil, 2015.

Suggested Content

Protecting latin america’s poor during economic crises.

History tells us that economic crises cause large increases in poverty. The most recent economic crisis will cause Latin America’s GDP to contract around 2 percent in 2009.

Feb 18, 2010 ˙ Nora Lustig

Earthquake Exposes Haiti’s Silent Crisis

Haiti represents one of the most complex and deeply rooted challenges facing U.S. foreign policy in the Western Hemisphere: a failing state on the doorstep of the world’s most powerful nation.

Jan 13, 2010 ˙

Haiti’s Faint Signs of Progress Take a Vicious Blow

Since achieving independence in 1804 to become the world’s first free black state, Haiti has been beset by turbulent, often violent, politics and a gradual but seemingly unstoppable slide from austerity to poverty to misery.

Jan 14, 2010 ˙