Democratic rights, democratic wrongs: explaining discontent in Latin America

 Latin America is currently experiencing its longest period of democratic rule. But democracy in the region remains unstable and has failed to reduce the gap between the poor and rich. In 2009, eighteen Latin American presidents had failed to complete their mandate notes in the past twenty years (UNPD, 2009). There have been coup d’états in Venezuela (2002), Ecuador (2000 and 2005) and Honduras (2009). The constitutions of the regions have been changed many times in the recent decades and the political systems are still ridden with vestiges of authoritarianism. More importantly though, the corruption, lack of unity and polarisations that characterise Latin American politics have led to a discontent with regards to democracy which continues to grow in some of the region’s countries.

In 2006 only 50% of Latin Americans were in favour of democracy and whilst that number has been edging up, in some countries still too few residents are in favour of such a political system. Mexico and Brazil, Latin America’s two biggest countries, only have approximately half of their residents as convinced democrats. The regional average stood at 44% in 2010, a huge improvement from the 25% of 2001, yet a still worryingly low percentage.

Naturally, there are huge disparities within the region which explain this rate. We can note four countries, Uruguay, Panama, Chile and Costa Rica, which are relatively or even highly content with the way democracy functions in their respective countries. Uruguay leads with nearly 80% of its population satisfied with theway the democracy is run. However, the rest of the Latin American states either have half or barely half of their residents satisfied with their democratic system. Guatemala, Peru and, right at the bottom, Mexico, all have 30% or less of their residents who are satisfied with democracy and the way it is run. A worrying trend for democracy in a region that has been prone to authoritarianism.

Colonialism and military regimes have naturally weakened institutions and also explain the numerous changes made to Latin American constitutions. Yet, from the remains of the Pinochet era in Chile to the lack of democratic institutions in Mexico, the region on the whole has failed to transform its political systems into ones where democracy can function properly. Reforms have not sufficed. Álvaro Vargas Llosa, a Peruvian analyst, explains that "reform ultimately involves undoing more than doing". As a result, just like during the colonial and authoritarian epochs these faulty systems continue to benefit but a few namely political leaders and their cronies. The ensuing concentration of wealth and power go against the principles of democracy and even in countries which have undergone much improvement, huge socioeconomic disparities persist. Citizen well-being is key for democracy and its sustainability and should concern the Latin American population in its integrity.

Nonetheless, despite the fact that colonialism ended nearly two centuries ago, indigenous and black populations in Latin America continue to be highly marginalised, excluded from society and without a political voice. In South American countries in particular, low levels of mestizaje (‘crossbreeding’) creates an "us and them" division which explains for the most part why black and indigenous populations in this area or indios for the latter, suffer from a lack of representation.  The exclusion in this area is so high that it is not just a socioeconomic exclusion but a cultural one too. A serious and debilitating problem for democracy considering that these two ethnic groups make-up a non-negligible proportion of the region’s inhabitants. African-Americans and indigenous people in the Latin American and Caribbean region respectively account for 10% and 30% of the total population, and in Guatemala, Peru and Bolivia, indigenous people constitute at least half of the population. Yet, black populations and indios are still the most prone to unemployment, labour discrimination, disproportionate poverty and poor access to basic services. Of even more concern is that Latin America is the region that has made the least progress in terms of reducing the poverty of its indigenous people than any other region with indigenous populations. The consequences of this high level of exclusion is that black people and indios want nothing to do with the system that is currently in place, in other words democracy.

We can explain this seemingly indifference towards the integration of indios and black people in Latin America due to other perceived priorities that these countries have. Economic stability and economic vocation other than drug-related growth are of much concern and corruption is also a tendency that plagues many Latin American countries and affects the efficiency of the democratic systems in place. Rigged elections are common in countries like Venezuela and in 2011, Nicaragua re-elected an ex-Sandinista, Daniel Ortega, after he successfully got the Supreme Court of Justice to rule that article 147 of the Constitution which prohibits presidents from being re-elected was in fact a violation of human rights.

But what do these problems mean exactly for democracy? Democracy in Latin America was chosen to fight perceived social and economic injustices. But with millions living in the favelas (slums) surrounding the Brazilian megalopolis, drug-related violence still plaguing Central American states, and the ongoing gap between poor and rich, it is of no wonder that the Latin Americans are disillusioned with their political systems. Democracy has failed to give meaning to the concept of ‘citizenship’. 

That is not to say that democracy is not present in the region. Latin America has made considerable progress regarding the freedom of the press, demonstrations and protests in many countries are relatively  free of police repression and persecution, and despite the inequalities there a few welcoming signs of socioeconomic mobility: Brazil’s ex-president Luiz Inacio ‘Lula’ da Silva, the son of Brazilian labourer, was after all a man of the people. However, Latin America is still not free from the risk of authoritarianism and this risk will grow if democracy does not achieve its objective of citizen well-being.