Why is Latin America so vulnerable to dictatorships?

Image source - Europeana

This article was originally published on Jan 1, 2025.

‍

Latin America has, throughout its history, been a region characterized by instability in its political, economic and social spheres, which has led to both the emergence and consolidation of dictatorships. Although democracy has progressed in much of the continent, vestiges of authoritarian regimes still remain and, in certain contexts, the conditions that could facilitate the return of dictatorships remain latent. This recurring pattern raises critical questions about the root causes of such susceptibility and its implications for the future of democracy in the region.

‍

Throughout its history, various Latin American countries have fallen under the control of military or civil dictatorships, which have used power for their own benefit, limiting political freedoms and citizen participation. This ranges from Juan Perón of Argentina (1895-1974) to Nicolas Madura of Venezuela, and Daniel Ortega Saavedra of Nicaragua today. The theme of imperialism also explains a proneness to dictatorships, with a long history of control by the United States and the Hispanic world.

‍

One of the foundational factors contributing to the region’s vulnerability is its colonial past. The colonial era in Latin America began in the 15th-16th centuries when explorers such as Christopher Columbus and Amerigo Vespucci made voyages of discovery to the New World. The conquistadors who followed, including Hernán Cortés and Francisco Pizarro, brought Spanish rule to much of the region, using violence and cultural oppression. Furthermore, the expansion of United States imperialism toward Latin America began even before Mexico's declaration of independence in 1821. In 1803, the United States purchased the territory of Louisiana, recently transferred from Spanish to French control under pressure from the French dictator Napoleon Bonaparte. At first, American interest in imperialism focused on maintaining economic domination of the United States, but the nation became a police force in the Western Hemisphere. Despite the wars of independence, this legacy of centralized power left a blueprint for future leaders, making authoritarian rule a familiar model. It seems that to a certain extent Latin America will never achieve total independence from the conquering colonies; given this belongs vulnerability to the other forces.

‍

In analyzing the vulnerability of the continent, we need to distance ourselves from the issue and explore the existing divisions in Latin America itself. This raises the question of whether the continent can be considered unified. In many ways, the answer would appear to be no. There are several languages ​​from Portuguese, Spanish, and even English in the colony of Guyana. Furthermore, the differences in terms of culture are undeniable given the historical connections of conquering countries and the current links through trade, military, etc. Additionally, we cannot ignore the difference in the levels of development between the countries of the region. For example, we take Chile, Argentina and Brazil, and compare their facilities against the less developed countries of Haiti and Honduras. In many cases, the lack of deep democratic traditions and strong republican institutions has been an obstacle to the development of solid democracies in the region. Being less developed than other countries, judicial, legislative and control institutions have not always been independent or effective in the protection of human rights, which facilitates the concentration of power in the hands of a single figure or group. Additionally, the impact of the difference in GNI between countries - needless to say - has a huge impact on the stability of countries and their ability to reject rising indigenous figures/regimes that offer a solution.

‍

Furthermore, Latin America can be seen as one of the regions with the greatest social and economic inequalities. These disparities have generated social tensions which have often been taken advantage of by authoritarian groups to manipulate popular discontent and justify the use of force. Once in power, these leaders often consolidate authority, undermining democratic institutions under the guise of delivering on their promises. This undoubtedly contributes to the vulnerability of dictatorships, who have sometimes presented themselves as "solutions" to crises, promising stability in exchange for the suppression of civil liberties.

‍

Furthermore, in some cases, there has existed a political culture in which authoritarianism is not only tolerated, but is seen as a legitimate form of exercise of power. During the colonial era, the political structures of Latin America were imposed by European powers. After independence, many nations were left with weak institutions and without a consolidated democratic tradition. Fragile judicial systems, inadequate checks and balances, and corruption make it easier for authoritarian figures to seize and maintain power. Perhaps some of the most famous examples of this are the Actions of the Liberator and later Dictator Simón Bolívar. This lack of institutional strength facilitated the emergence of military or authoritarian dictatorships.

‍

Cultural factors also contribute to the persistence of authoritarianism in the region. This has been fueled by a lack of civic education, inequality in access to political power, and expectations that order can only be maintained through force. A historical emphasis on strong leadership personalities - often associated with caudillismo - also remains embedded in the political culture. They are in many cases supported by economic and military elites who play a key role in supporting these authoritarian regimes. The existence of a powerful oligarchy, which sees its interests threatened by democratic movements or reforms, can facilitate the rise of dictators willing to protect those interests, even at the expense of democratic freedoms.

‍

Also, in many Latin American countries, ideological struggles have created extreme polarization between the most conservative and the most progressive sectors. In this context, the military or authoritarian leaders have presented themselves as guarantors of order and stability in the face of chaos and violence, appealing to security as a justification for restricting freedoms. The military in Latin America has historically played a fundamental role in politics, not only as armed forces, but as decisive actors in political life. In many countries, the armed forces have had considerable influence on the government and, at times, have intervened directly in political affairs to impose dictatorships. The idea of ​​"safeguarding order" and "protecting the nation" has been used as a justification for this intervention in politics.

‍

So, what is the path forward? What is clear is that addressing Latin America’s vulnerability to dictatorships requires a multifaceted approach. Firstly, weak administrative institutions need to be eradicated or strengthened to fit a more successful democratic framework that ensures judicial independence and promotes transparency. Economic reforms aimed at bridging the inequality gap and that foster growth to incite trade markets and reduce hyperinflation. Still under the precedence of previous dictatorial economic policies, economic growth is in many countries outdated and in need of reinvigoration. Chile is just one example of such, with recent protests against their former dictator’s (Augusto Pinochet) neoliberal policies that failed to establish a sound economic framework for future growth. Such reform can help mitigate the appeal of authoritarian leaders. Additionally, increased funding and dedication to the civil sectors, including education, healthcare, housing crises, and general social welfare are fundamental. Awareness and education that emphasise democratic values and human rights are crucial for building a resilient political culture.

‍

In short, Latin America's vulnerability to dictatorships is due to a complex network of historical, socioeconomic, political and cultural factors. Because of its history of colonialism, and its subsequent deficiencies in terms of solid internal structures, it is clear that independence, along with political freedom, remains a constant challenge. Over the centuries, democratic institutions in many countries in the region have not been sufficiently consolidated, which has facilitated the emergence again and again of authoritarian governments and personalities. What is obvious is that without resolving its internal instability, Latin America will always remain vulnerable to authoritative regimes, with the tendency to victimize dictatorial regimes. The road ahead may be challenging, but with proper application, learning from past mistakes, and fostering stronger and more inclusive systems, Latin America can chart a path toward a future where democracy can prevail.