Democracy in Ecuador

Democracy in Ecuador: Independent and Regional Implications

The Western world's attempt to spread democracy to all corners of the world has lead to regime shifts, wars, and countless debates regarding the proper use of democracy and where it should be best implemented. Latin America is one region in which democracy has failed to take root. Instead of transforming the area's dictatorships into shining democracies in which people had the ability to vote for the leader that they thought would best run the country, they turned to corruption and failure, changing what Padgett said "should have been a golden age for Latin lawmakers"

into a bleak forecast. Padgett also contends that this is why Venezuelan dictator Hugo Chavez was met with such congratulation in the region. He was most likely a better ruler, in the eyes of the Venezuelan people, than a so-called democratic institution that was fraught with corruption.

Padgett implies that before Chavez took control of the government and put an end to the legislative, legislators were making money off of oil-profits while Venezuelan citizens had little

. Indeed, corruption marks most of the democracies that were encouraged by the United States and its partner nations in an attempt to bring democratic rule to the world. Legislative office is seen as a place to take bribes and to make money instead of a place to help one's country move from dictatorship to democracy. Some stunning examples of this corruption include the Brazilian legislative branch, which is so filled with corruption that members spend most of their time dealing with the aftermath of the corruption than making laws for the people. Argentina's elections are so much of a show that citizens do not even make an attempt to vote legitimately, but instead cast ballots for fictitious persons.

But among all these examples of democracy gone wrong in Latin America stands Ecuador, the state that Padgett claims is "among the nation's three most graft-ridden countries"

. Of course, this description begs the question, "why?" Or, "how did Ecuador come to this point?" Because history is of the utmost importance when discussing the case of Ecuador today, an exploration of Ecuador's history will allow students of political science to make an judgment about Ecuador and Latin America's future success with democracy.

I. An Overview of Ecuador's Democratic Trends

According to Sanderson, Ecuador's long history of tumultuous politics begins as far back as its Spanish ancestry, with the imperial attitudes of authoritarianism and "personalism,"

In the 1960s and 1970s, dictatorships, or military governments, ruled the country in a way that was superior to democracy's attempt, primarily because attempts at democracy, which has been the intention of the government since 1979, have been disorganized

. During the period of military rule, one regime would simply replace the other through military a military coup.

When democracy came in 1979, it succeed in a disorganized fashion until 1997, when the president was removed by means which were other than democratic.

The previous three Ecuadorian presidents have been "removed from office amid anti-government protests."

Since 1997, Ecuador has had eight presidents -- three of which have been forced out of office by the public and countless legislators who have not ceased to let down the public by engaging in corruption and very little lawmaking (Perdomo, Padgett). Among these presidents, the country has had 19 constitutions in 177 years (Padgett para. 2). Other evidence of disorganization can be found in the parties themselves, which tend to be small and unable to hold real power, and are unable to hold sway with the public. Further, divisions among government powers that allow for corruption have made the benefits of democracy few at best (Sanderson para. 1).

The country's twentieth constitution was just accepted in 2008, when by referendum the population voted to accept the new constitution introduced by current president Rafael Correa, who was recently re-elected as president of Ecuador under his own constitution.

According to Perdomo, Correa is not unique in his claims that a new constitution will save Ecuador. Correa argues that Ecuadorian democracies have failed because of policies imposed by the United States, and inequality between the rich and the poor, as well as the United States' "denouncing Ecuador's traditional political class, which he says has pillaged the country's natural resources" (para. 3). Thus, Perdomo lumps Correa in with the other left-leaning Latin American leaders who have attempted to swing Latin America toward a more productive government through the blaming of American institutions and using new constitutions. Perdomo expresses hope that Correa is the break that Ecuador is looking for, as the Western-educated economist has "expressed some reasonable policy ideas" when not engaged in the act of campaigning or attempting to sway public opinion.

When he states that Ecuador is in such a dismal political state because of its economic and social construction, Correa is not wrong. In fact, Celso argues that in many emerging democracies the gap between the middle-class and the elected official is still quite large. In fact, Celso writes that "many citizens of developing-world countries remain unsatisfied with the way their democracies work."

Indeed, Celso goes on to argue that many middle-class citizens of emerging democracies protest the democratically elected presidents, wanting to remove them form their leadership positions "because of their lack of competence, corruption, or both."

Looking specifically at Ecuador, Celso argues that, along with the Philippines, Ecuador has experienced "dictatorship, political instability, and landed oligarchs dominating politics."

An example of the middle-class's refusal to put up with such corruption in the future can be seen in the 2005 protests against Lucio Guiterrez, in which members of the middle-class argued that they were fed-up with less than democratic leaders.

These class and geographic divisions among Ecuador's people are nothing new. For centuries, the conflict between the conservative Quito capital and the liberal coast has caused political problems in the area, starting when the Spanish came to the area. Further, divisions among the classes have caused unrest within the area.

Thus, Ecuador's political history is tumultuous at best. While the practice of colonialism has long been discussed as a means through which current democracies fail, specific evidence of this can be seen through Ecuador's position. Spanish imperialism fostered attitudes among Ecuadorians that managed to thwart their attempts at democracy. Other pre-existing conditions such as social and geographical boundaries have further hindered democracy's attempt to take root. Further, the history of difficulties that democracies have experienced in Ecuador may be another reason that democracy will always struggle, or will struggle for quite some time, in the region. Because they are used to changing the way that a country operates through constitutional reformation instead of legislation and elections, it may be difficult for future leaders to break this cycle and start a new one that is based in genuine democratic rule.

II. Implications for the Future

Despite this history of political unrest, hope for the future of democracy in Ecuador can be cited. For some, including Predomo, Correa is that hope. Correa was elected, primarily because "he was not a traditional politician," and has poured money into resolving some of the social issues that plague Ecuador thus far into is presidency.

Although he is "regarded as the strongest leader in decades to be at Ecuador's helm," and is an Economist who was schooled in the United States, Correa has already caused problems on the financial circuit by defaulting on loans and may not have the economic training necessary to resolve the financial issues that will come his way. He has also been accused of attempting to form a dictatorship and confounding United States issues.

Regardless of this, Correa is a different kind of candidate, and if his interest in the country is sure, the world may see a more democratic Ecuador in the short-term. But if his opponents are too vigorous, Correa may not be the savior that Ecuador was waiting for. Still, this does not discount the fact that Ecuador's salvation may come in the form of a president who is dedicated to democracy and the Ecuadorian people.

In addition, another glimmer of hope can be drawn from the fact that many people in Ecuador want democracy. In fact, Radio La Luna has been a radio station advocating democracy in Ecuador for 25 years, despite the tumultuous political climate. The radio station "began playing a pivotal role on the political scene by providing citizens with a steady stream of information about political developments within the country and later giving them a 'voice' through its 'open mike' policy."