Latin American Countries Lean Toward Democratic Governments (1985)

by Jeffrey Bingham Mead
Greenwich Time: April 3, 1985

Most of the nations of Latin America currently are experiencing a phenomenon that is quite a turning point. Over many years, the various independent countries "south of the border" have had a reputation for being a turbulent, politically unmanageable collection of states dominated by the whims of a string of repressive military dictatorships.

Fortunately, that particular standing is giving way to a new resurgence of popularly-elected democratic institutions. This is itself an amazing milestone in a region of the world where democracy has been something the junta leaders feel unrestrained at times to take away. In country after country, most recently in Uruguay and Brazil, these same military generals have or will be yielding the powers of government to newly popularly elected civilian administrations.

Historically, Latin American development toward a new-fashioned democratic society is distinct and unique from most of the world. The idea of democratic principles were molded as transplanted hybrids of European societies. Democratic government and its institutions have come later and under more difficult circumstances than in the United States.

Independence for most of Latin America saw the creation of neo-colonial type societies that often carried on the conventional way of life that had existed under colonial rule. The attainment of a unified, national leadership often did not happen or develop in the predominately European populated countries like Argentina for many years after independence. The wealth of these countries was basically agrarian, constraining the materialization of an urban populace. Injustice and discrimination occurred mostly as an outgrowth of the particular views of those politically active. True, the national aims, the accompanying proclamations and indeed the form of government was based on the broad-minded principles stemming from Europe, but the real content of the existing institutions did not and today in many cases does not effect the individual.

The sharing, or distribution of political power was highly confined for many years. Europeans, who were the minority and held the most political clout, were disinclined to share power with the majority Mestizos, Indians and blacks. This had led to the widening gap between the wealthy few and the impoverished majority. Further, the minority tended to invest their wealth abroad instead of in their home countries.

Of all the countries of Latin America, Mexico was the first to extend real substantive citizenship to all of the inhabitants. Under the revolutionary constitutional reforms of the early part of the century, the Mexicans embarked on ambitious land reform programs and promoted methodical social and economic development under the auspices of the government. These leaders were themselves energetic and were inspired by their principles, in both the broad-minded and revolutionary sense. They were able to augment a custom of political discipline and reform. It is also fair to say that Mexico's geographic proximity to the United States, together with American investments, commercial trade and the American power of example inspired of Mexico.

The situation in each country today is individually different than others. Uruguay, for example, represents the fifth military junta to be superseded by freely elected civilian government in the last five years. The generals had originally taken over the reins of power to crush a left-wing uprising after it was received that the civilian government was too unresponsive. While the generals did succeed in their goal, the brutality of their actions quickly extended to the rest of the population. The excesses of the junta, resulting in popular unrest, paved the way for the recent election of President Sanguinetti. He faces many inherited economic problems, such as an exceedingly high foreign debt, 15 percent unemployment and a large decline in wages.

Likewise, President Raul Alfonsin, who was also freely elected in Argentina's miraculous turn toward a renewed strength in democratic institutions, is attempting to solve inherited problems from former military leaders. He and members of his administration must cope with a $43 billion foreign debt and a 433 percent inflation rate. Also, the armed forces have opposed all plans to judicially hold accountable officers want to be guilty of murder and other atrocities in the so-called "dirty war," when over eight thousand died.

In most of the nations of Latin America, democracy is a fragile commodity. The renewal of democratic institutions has not reduced the restlessness of the people, many of whom are frustrated with the abyss between rich and poor as well as the stagnant poverty that persists.

Furthermore, the resurgence of democracy has not helped Latin America pay off its $350 billion debt. Country after country is been forced or soon will be, to impose very harsh and unpopular measures of austerity.

Americans must realize the tenacity of past phases of democratic episodes in Latin America. The measure of success depends of each country's ability to establish democratic institutions as a secure method of national problem-solving. 

Today, the United States leads the world by its power, its economic clout and its example in the process of economic transformation. By this same token, we also have the ability and an obligation including our own national interest to see to it that the process of democratic and economic reform in the Western Hemisphere stable and successful.

Jeffrey Bingham Mead is a resident of Greenwich and a direct descendent of one of the founding families of the town. He graduated recently with a degree in English from Pace University.