This study aims to demonstrate the reasons why there is a prevailing difference in democratization between the south American countries Chile and Peru. By applying democratization researchers, Juan Linz, and Alfred Stepans framework: The Five Arenas of a Consolidated Democracy, and a causal mechanism. I discover an institutional and civil pattern which when functional, contributes to democratization. In the case of Chile, the results show that a strong rule of law and states apparatus, institutionally makes democracy the only game in town in Chile. However, in the case of Peru, the weak state apparatus and rule of law allows undemocratic forms of action which in part, can explain the difference in democratization. The results that emanate from the civil society, show that both countries suffer from weak connection to the political arena which in turn affects the economical arena. This also gives implications to the remaining democratizing challenges for Chile and Peru. The results however are affected by the strengths and shortcomings of Linz & Stepans framework which is also discussed in this study.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:UPSALLA1/oai:DiVA.org:umu-184888 |
| Date | January 2021 |
| Creators | Alvear Bello, Ivan |
| Publisher | Umeå universitet, Statsvetenskapliga institutionen |
| Source Sets | DiVA Archive at Upsalla University |
| Language | Swedish |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Student thesis, info:eu-repo/semantics/bachelorThesis, text |
| Format | application/pdf |
| Rights | info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
Page generated in 0.0021 seconds