What is it about?
We found political polarization in the public opinion started well before social movements shaked the political debate in 2011. Up to the mid of 2000s a serie of bad electoral performances weakened the political power of moderates within their political coalitions slowly changing the electoral incentives of politicians to the search of consensus. After that a new political agenda was in motion departed from moderate positions and puting into question tacit agreements that were part of the political landscape since the recovery of the democracy in 1990.
Featured Image
Why is it important?
Polarization reduce the space for agreement. In Chile, it is happening in a context of lower interest on public affairs and a decline on political participations. This mix creates conditions for the emergence of populist politicians willing to exacerbate the differences to get into power even at the cost of democracy itself.
Perspectives
Democracy is at risk all around the world. We need to understand how and when we, as citizens, collectively created the conditions for that to happen. It is the only way we could find how to defend democracy from its own weaknesses and protect human rights.
Jorge Fábrega
Universidad del Desarrollo
Read the Original
This page is a summary of: Polarization and Electoral Incentives: The End of the Chilean Consensus Democracy, 1990–2014, Latin American Politics and Society, October 2018, Cambridge University Press,
DOI: 10.1017/lap.2018.41.
You can read the full text:
Resources
Contributors
The following have contributed to this page
