No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
The 1980 Image-Index Survey of Latin American Political Democracy
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 24 October 2022
Extract
Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Every five years a survey of this sort is attempted with the goal of reflecting the “democratic weathervane” of Latin American politics. Since Russell Fitzgibbon launched the experiment in 1945, regular attempts have been made to tap the minds of expert panelists in a reputational evaluation of which countries are the most and least democratic. Many Latin American nations claim that political democracy is their goal (my understanding of democracy in theory and practice is alluded to in the notes below), although they choose to reach it via contrasting routes. Blatant dictatorships often use the plebiscite as a means of demonstrating that they enjoy popular approval and acclaim, and single-party “democracies” regularly give the appearance of popular support via controlled elections. Latin Americans may feel that North Americans have an excess baggage of ego and ethnocentricity in pretending to evaluate democracy to the south according to our criteria; that is probably a just reaction. But the Latin Americans do boast constitutional structures and theoretic pronouncements patterned after ours. They have also accepted considerable North American assistance and financial largesse in the alleged quest for the democratic “good life.” And Latin American scholars frequently evaluate the status of political democracy in the so-called Anglo-American parliamentary states. Evaluating democracy is thus a two-way street, and the enterprise may yield mutual rewards and pitfalls.
- Type
- Research Reports and Notes
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © 1982 by the University of Texas Press
References
Notes
1. I set forth a statement on political democracy, drawing on the writings of a number of theorists, in the 1975 report of the Image-Index that appeared in LARR 11, no. 2 (1976). Briefly, the schema consisted of these criteria: (1) popular sovereignty under impartial rules; (2) a clear and enforced distinction between that which is public and that which is private; (3) free and honest popular elections, speech, and press; (4) public accountability-sanctions via recall initiative; (5) stakes in the political process are not so high as to render compromise by vote impossible; and (6) the state has a humanistic goal thrust (it serves the people rather than robbing and repressing them for elite enrichment). The reader is referred to the LARR article cited above, especially pp. 137–38, for fuller discussion.
2. Georgie Anne Geyer writing in the Los Angeles Times, 22 February 1970.
3. Ibid.
4. Mary Helen Spooner writing in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, 19 October 1980.
5. Diario Las Américas (Miami), 13 September 1980.
6. From an editorial in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, 3 December 1980.
7. Tom J. Farer, “Reagan's Latin America,” The New York Review of Books, 19 March 1981, p. 15. Many of the advocates of democratic reform alluded to by Farer are likely to have home countries which have received U.S. aid and assistance. Recent research has shown that such aid does not always go to the most benevolent and democratic regimes. As Lars Schoultz has written, U.S. military assistance in particular has “tended to flow disproportionately to Latin American governments which torture their citizens” (“U.S. Foreign Policy and Human Rights Violations in Latin America,” Comparative Politics [January 1981], p. 155).
8. See, in particular, my article in Wilkie and Ruddle, eds., Methodology in Quantitative Latin American Studies (Los Angeles: UCLA Center for Latin American Studies, 1976). See also Johnson and Williams, Democracy, Power and Intervention, Special Studies No. 17 (Tempe: Arizona State University, Center for Latin American Studies, 1978).
9. William S. Ackroyd, Social Sciences, University of Arizona; Marvin Alisky, Political Science, Arizona State University; Charles D. Ameringer, History, Pennsylvania State University; John Bailey, Government, Georgetown University; Enrique A. Baloyra, Political Science, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill; J. W. Barchfield, Economics, Southern Oregon State College; C. Richard Bath, Political Science, University of Texas at El Paso; Marvin D. Bernstein, History, SUNY at Buffalo, Amherst Campus; Robert E. Biles, Government, Sam Houston State University; Jan K. Black, Social Sciences, University of New Mexico; George I. Blanksten, Political Science, Northwestern University; Cole Blasier, Political Science, University of Pittsburgh; John A. Booth, Social Sciences, University of Texas at San Antonio; Winfield J. Burggraaff, History, University of Missouri; David Bushnell, History, University of Florida; Roderic A. Camp, Political Science, Central College; William J. Carroll, III, Social Sciences, University of Arizona; Henry A. Christopher, Political Science, St. Louis University; Richard L. Clinton, Social Sciences, Oregon State University; Juan del Aguila, Political Science, Emory University; Edward C. Epstein, Political Science, University of Utah; Gaston A. Fernandez, Political Science, St. Olaf College; Julio A. Fernandez, Political Science, SUNY at Cortland; David W. Foster, Foreign Languages, Arizona State University; Michael F. Fry, Library Science, Tulane University; Charles Fleener, History, St. Louis University; Federico G. Gil, Political Science, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill; Jo M. Griesgraber, Social Sciences, WOLA, Washington, D.C.; Stephen Haber, History, Los Angeles; Howard Handelman, Political Science, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee; Ronald G. Hellman, Social Sciences, New York; Gary Hoskin, Political Science, SUNY at Buffalo; Philip L. Kelly, Political Science, Emporia State University; Michael Kryzanek, Political Science, Bridgewater State College; William LeoGrande, Government, American University; Naomi Lindstrom, Foreign Languages, University of Texas at Austin; Sheldon B. Liss, History, University of Akron; Donald Mabry, History, Mississippi State University; R. Michael Malek, History, University of South Alabama; John D. Martz, Political Science, Pennsylvania State University: Ronald H. McDonald, Political Science, Syracuse University; Sandra McGee, History, N. Manchester, Indiana; James W. McKenney, Political Science, Wichita State University; Richard Millett, History, Southern Illinois University–Edwardsville; Robert A. Monson, Political Science, University of Arkansas; Stephen P. Mumme, Political Science, University of Arizona; Martin C. Needier, Political Science, University of New Mexico; Neale J. Pearson, Political Science, Texas Tech University; Robert L. Peterson, Political Science, University of Texas at El Paso; Adalberto J. Pinelo, Social Sciences, Northern Kentucky University; Guy Poitras, Political Science, Trinity University; Peter L. Reich, History, Los Angeles; Riordan Roett, Political Science, SAIS, Johns Hopkins University; J. Mark Ruhl, Political Science, Dickinson College; Lars Schoultz, Political Science, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill; Carl Schwarz, Political Science, Fullerton College; Mitchell A. Seligson, Political Science, University of Arizona; John W. Sloan, Political Science, University of Houston; Peter G. Snow, Political Science, University of Iowa; Charles L. Stansifer, History, University of Kansas; Dale Story, Political Science, University of Texas at Arlington; Andres Suarez, Political Science, University of Florida; Joseph S. Tulchin, History, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill; Fred Turner, Political Science, University of Connecticut; Franz A. von Sauer, Political Science, Oklahoma State University; Brian F. Wallace, Political Science, Francis Marion College; Richard J. Walter, History, Washington University; Robert Wesson, Political Science, Hoover Institution; Howard Wiarda, Political Science, University of Massachusetts; James W. Wilkie, History, University of California at Los Angeles; Edward J. Williams, Political Science, University of Arizona; Miles Williams, Political Science, Central Missouri State University; R. L. Woodward, Jr., History, Tulane University.
Addenda: Robert Bezdek, University of Texas, Corpus Christi; Stephen Haber is History, Los Angeles State University.
A correction has been issued for this article:
You have
Access
Linked content
Please note a has been issued for this article.