Distrusting democrats seek accountability and advocate reform in established democracies. Do they behave similarly in new democracies? Using AmericasBarometer survey data, cluster analysis identifies five profiles of democratic support in Chile: democrat, delegative, fair-weather, illiberal, and autocrat. Chilean distrusting democrats are more active in protest politics but less active in electoral politics than other Chileans, especially fair-weather democrats. The support profiles better predict these behaviors than the classic Linzian and Churchillian measures of democratic support. Thus, distrusting democrats in Chile only partially emulate their counterparts in established democracies, suggesting citizen-led democratic reforms in new democracies could be far more challenging.
AlmondGabriel A.VerbaSidney. 1963. The civic culture: Political attitudes and democracy in five nations. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
2.
BonillaClaudio A.CarlinRyan E.LoveGregory J.MéndezErnesto Silva. Forthcoming. Social or political cleavages? A spatial analysis of the party system in post-authoritarian Chile. Public Choice.
3.
BoothJohn A.SeligsonMitchell A.2005. Political legitimacy and participation in Costa Rica: Evidence of arena shopping. Political Research Quarterly58:537-50.
4.
BoothJohn A.SeligsonMitchell A.2009. The legitimacy puzzle in Latin America: Political support in eight nations. New York: Cambridge University Press.
5.
BrantRollin F.1990. Assessing Proportionality in the Proportional Odds Models for Ordinal Logistic Regression. Biometrics46:1171-78.
6.
BrattonMichaelMattesRobert. 2001. Support for democracy in Africa: Intrinsic or Instrumental?British Journal of Political Science31:447-74.
7.
CainBruce E.DaltonRussell J.ScarrowSusan E., eds. 2003. Democracy transformed: Expanding political opportunities in advanced industrial democracies. New York: Oxford University Press.
8.
CanacheDamarys. 2002. Venezuela: Public opinion and protest in a fragile democracy. Coral Gables, FL: North-South Center Press.
9.
CanacheDamarysMondakJeffery J.SeligsonMitchell A.2001. Meaning and measurement in cross-national research on satisfaction with democracy. Public Opinion Quarterly65:506-28.
10.
CarlinRyan E.2006. The decline of citizen participation in electoral politics in post-authoritarian Chile. Democratization13:632-51.
11.
CarlinRyan E.SingerMatthew M.2011. Support for Polyarchy in the Americas. Comparative Political Studies: 44
12.
CarnaghanEllen. 2007. Out of order: Russian political values in an imperfect world. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press.
13.
CarriónJulio F.2008. Illiberal democracy and normative democracy: How is democracy defined in the Americas? In Challenges to democracy in Latin America and the Caribbean: Evidence from the AmericasBarometer 2006–07, ed. SeligsonMitchell A., 21-46. Washington, DC: US-AID.
14.
CatterbergGabriela. 2003. Evaluations, referents of support, and political action in new democracies. International Journal of Comparative Sociology44:173-98.
15.
CatterbergGabrielaMorenoAlejandro. 2005. The individual bases of political trust: Trends in new and established democracies. International Journal of Public Opinion Research18:31-48.
16.
ClearyMatthew R.StokesSusan C.2006. Democracy and the culture of skepticism: Personalism and institutionalism in Argentina and Mexico. New York: Russell Sage.
17.
CollierDavidLevitskySteven. 1997. Democracy with adjectives: Conceptual innovation in comparative research. World Politics49:430-51.
18.
ConversePhilip E.1964. The nature of belief systems in mass publics. In Ideology and discontent, ed. ApterDavid E., 206-61. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
19.
CoppedgeMichael. n.d.Approaching democracy: Research methods in comparative politics.
20.
CoppedgeMichaelAlvarezAngelMaldonadoClaudio. 2008. Two persistent dimensions of democracy: Contestation and inclusiveness. Journal of Politics70:632-47.
21.
DahlRobert A.1971. Polyarchy: Participation and opposition. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
22.
DaltonRussell J.1994. Communists and democrats: Democratic attitudes in the two Germanies. British Journal of Politics24:469-93.
23.
DaltonRussell J.2004. Democratic challenges, democratic choices. New York: Oxford University Press.
24.
DaltonRussell J.WattenbergMartin P., eds. 2000. Parties without partisans. New York: Oxford University Press.
25.
DiamondLarryMorlinoLeonardo. 2005. Introduction. In Assessing the quality of democracy, ed. DiamondLarryMorlinoLeonardo, ix-xliii. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
26.
DryzekJohn S.HolmesLeslie. 2002. Post-communist democratization. New York: Cambridge University Press.
27.
DudaRichard O.HartPeter E.1973. Pattern classification and scene analysis. New York: John Wiley.
28.
EastonDavid. 1975. A reassessment of the concept of political support. British Journal of Political Science5:435-57.
29.
GallieWalter Bryce. 1956. Essentially contested concepts. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society56:167-98.
30.
GamsonWilliam A.1968. Power and discontent. Homewood, IL: Dorsey Press.
31.
GeisselBrigitte. 2008. Reflections and findings on the critical citizen: Civic education—What for?European Journal of Political Research47:34-63.
32.
GibsonJames L.DuchRaymond M.TedinKent L.1992. Democratic values and the transformation of the Soviet Union. Journal of Politics54:329-71.
33.
GronkePaulLevittBarry. 2007. Traveling south: A U.S. theory of political culture goes to Latin America. Paper presented at the New Approaches to Democratic Culture conference, Université du Québec à Montréal.
34.
HofferbertRichard I.KlingemannHans-Dieter. 2001. Democracy and its discontents in post-wall Germany. International Political Science Review22:363-78.
35.
InglehartRonald. 2003. How solid is mass support for democracy—And how can we measure it. Political Science and Politics36:51-57.
36.
InglehartRonaldBasañezMiguelDíez-MedranoJaimeHalmanLoekLuijkxRuud, eds. 2004. Human beliefs and values: A cross-cultural sourcebook based on the 1999–2002 values surveys. Mexico City: Siglo XXI Editores, S.A. de C.V., and Fundación BBVA.
37.
InglehartRonaldWelzelChristian. 2005. Modernization, cultural change, and democracy: The human development sequence. New York: Cambridge University Press.
38.
KaufmannDanielKraayAartMastruzziMassimo. 2007. Governance matters VI: Aggregate and individual governance indicators 1996–2006. Policy Research Working Paper 4280, World Bank, Washington, DC.
39.
KingGaryHonakerJamesJosephAnneScheveKenneth. 2001. Analyzing incomplete political science data: An alternative algorithm for multiple imputation. American Political Science Review95:49-69.
40.
KlesnerJoseph L.2007. Social capital and political participation in Latin America: Evidence from Argentina, Chile, Mexico, and Peru. Latin American Research Review42(2): 1-32.
41.
KlingemannHans-Dieter. 1999. Mapping political support in the 1990s: A global analysis. In Critical citizens: Global support for democratic governance, ed. NorrisPippa, 31-56. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
42.
LevitskyStevenWayLucan A.2002. The rise of competitive authoritarianism. Journal of Democracy13(2): 51-65.
43.
LiKim-HungRaghunathanTrivelloreRubinDonald B.1991. Large-sample significance levels from multiply imputed data using moment-based statistics and an F reference distribution. Journal of the American Statistical Association86:1065-73.
44.
LipsetSeymour Martin. 1981. Political man. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
45.
LipsetSeymour MartinRokkanStein. 1967. Cleavage structures, party systems, and voter alignments: An introduction. In Party systems and voter alignments: Cross national perspectives, ed. LipsetSeymour MartinRokkanStein, 1-64. New York: Free Press.
46.
LunaJuan P.ZechmeisterElizabeth J.2005. Political representation in Latin America: A study of elite-mass congruence in nine countries. Comparative Political Studies33:388-416.
47.
MishlerWilliamRoseRichard. 2001. Political support for incomplete democracies: Realist vs. idealist theories and measures. International Political Science Review22:303-20.
48.
MishlerWilliamRoseRichard. 2005. What are the political consequences of trust? A test of cultural and institutional theories in Russia. Comparative Political Studies38:1050-78.
49.
MoehlerDevra C.2008. Distrusting democrats: Outcomes of participatory constitution making. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
50.
MontesJ. EstebanVialTomás. 2005. The constitution-building process in Chile: The authoritarian roots of a stable democracy. International IDEA. http://ww.idea.int/cbp/upload/CBP-Chile.pdf.
51.
NewtonKennethNorrisPippa. 2000. Confidence in public institutions: Faith, culture, or performance? In Disaffected democracies: What’s troubling the trilateral democracies? ed. PharrSusan J.PutnamRobert D., 52-73. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
52.
NorrisPippa. 1999a. Conclusions: The growth of critical citizens and its consequences. In Critical citizens: Global support for democratic governance, ed. NorrisPippa, 257-72. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
53.
NorrisPippa, ed. 1999b. Critical citizens: Global support for democratic governance. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
54.
NorrisPippa. 1999c. Introduction: The growth of critical citizens? In Critical citizens: Global support for democratic governance, ed. NorrisPippa, 1-27. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
55.
NorrisPippa. 2002. Democratic Phoenix: Reinventing political activism. New York: Cambridge University Press.
56.
NorrisPippaWalgraveStefaanVan AelstPeter. 2005. Who demonstrates? Anti-state rebels, conventional participants, or everyone?Comparative Politics37:189-205.
57.
NyeJoseph S.Jr.ZelikowPhillip D.KingDavid C., eds. 1997. Why don’t people trust government?Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
58.
O’DonnellGuillermo. 1994. Delegative Democracy. Journal of Democracy5(1): 55-69.
59.
O’DonnellGuillermo. 1999. Horizontal accountability in new democracies. In The self-restraining state: Power and accountability in new democracies, ed. SchedlerAndreasDiamondLarryPlattnerMark F., 29-52. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner.
60.
O’DonnellGuillermoSchmitterPhillppe C.WhiteheadLaurence, eds. 1986. Transitions from authoritarian rule: Tentative conclusions about uncertain democracies. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
61.
Ortega FreiEugenio. 2003. Los Partidos Políticos Chilenos: Cambio y Estabilidad en el Comportamiento Electoral 1990–2000. Revista de Ciencia Política23:109-47.
62.
OxhornPhilip D.1994. Where did all the protesters go? Popular mobilizations and the transition to democracy in Chile. Latin American Perspectives21(3): 49-68.
63.
PayneJ. MarkZovattoDanielDíazMercedes Mateo. 2007. Democracies in development: Politics and reform in Latin America. Washington, DC: Inter-American Development Bank and International IDEA.
64.
PharrSusan J.PutnamRobert D., eds. 2000. Disaffected democracies: What’s troubling the trilateral countries?Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
65.
PosnerPaul W.1999. Popular representation and political dissatisfaction in Chile’s new democracy. Journal of Interamerican and World Affairs41:59-85.
66.
PowersNancy R.2001. Grassroots expectations of democracy and economy: Argentina in comparative perspective. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.
67.
PutnamRobert D.1993. Making democracy work: Civic traditions in modern Italy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
68.
RoystonPatrick. 2005. Multiple imputation of missing values: Update of ICE. Stata Journal5:527-36.
69.
RubinDonald B.1987. Multiple imputation for nonresponse in surveys. New York: John Wiley.
70.
SarsfieldRodolfoEchegarayFabián. 2006. Opening the black box: How satisfaction with democracy and its perceived efficacy affect regime preference in Latin America. International Journal of Public Opinion Research18:153-73.
71.
SchedlerAndreas, ed. 2006. Electoral authoritarianism: The dynamics of unfree elections. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner.
72.
SchedlerAndreasSarsfieldRodolfo. 2007. Democrats with adjectives: Linking direct and indirect measures of democratic support. European Journal of Political Research46:637-59.
73.
SchedlerAndreasSarsfieldRodolfo. 2009. Demócratas Iliberales: Configuraciones Contradictorias de Apoyo a la Democracia en México. Espiral15(1): 123-53.
74.
ScullyTimothy R.1992. Rethinking the center: Party politics in nineteenth and twentieth century Chile. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
75.
SeligsonAmber L.TuckerJoshua A.2005. Feeding the hand that bit you: Voting for ex-authoritarian rulers in Russia and Bolivia. Demokratizatsiya: The Journal of Post-Soviet Democratization13:11-42.
76.
TorcalMarianoMainwaringScott. 2003. The political recrafting of social bases of party competition: Chile, 1973–95. British Journal of Political Science33:55-84.
77.
United Nations Development Programme. 2004. La Democracia en América Latina: Hacia una Democracia de Ciudadanas y Ciudadanos. Buenos Aires: Aguilar, Altea, Taurus, Alfaguara, S.A.
78.
ValenzuelaArturo. 1977. Political brokers in Chile: Local government in a centralized polity. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
79.
VerbaSidneySchlozmanKay LehmanBradyHenry E.1995. Voice and equality: Civic voluntarism in American politics. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
80.
WalkerLee Demetrius. 2009. Delegative democratic attitudes and institutional support in Central America. Comparative Politics42:83-101.
81.
ZakariaFareed. 1997. The rise of illiberal democracy. Foreign Affairs76(6): 22-43.
