Guatemala Revised

-->

Book Review

Demanding Democracy: Reform and Reaction in Costa Rica and Guatemala 1870’s – 1950’s By: Deborah J. Yashar

            For my senior seminar paper I am analyzing the effects of colonialism on Guatemala.  Guatemala today is still an authoritarian government, where it had no stable democratization in its history.  Deborah J. Yashar’s book is a great book to reference throughout my research.  She asks two important questions how democracy is formed and what conditions will keep it in place. 

             “It assesses the historically constructed conditions that have undergirded authoritarianism and the actors that have set out to overcome them.  It takes structures seriously insofar as the organization of states, the economy, and society often institutionalize a given distribution of power, a set of vested interests, and modes of interaction.  These institutions provide the constraints within which and against which actors maneuver.  They are also likely to provide the conditions to predispose actors to favor one political outcome over another”. Yashar compares Guatemala and Costa Rica.  Two countries with similar historical backgrounds but Costa Rica enjoys a democracy where Guatemala is still under an authoritarian rule.  Yashar explains four postulates for democracy within the book. 

            In postulate one Yashar breaks down how states function in relation to markets and economy in the sense that it makes a division of people.  She says that states and markets have played a dominant role in configuring, institutionalizing, and regulating the distribution of resources and the property rights that uphold it.  Yashar argues that these markets delineate political institutions and distribution of resources that have undergirded authoritarian rule.  Within the book Yashar explains that the agro export market of Guatemala within the 1860’s to the 1880’s.  Guatemala was ranked the fourth biggest coffee producer in the world within the 1960’s.  Obstacles such as infrastructure made it harder to keep the trade up because of this Guatemala constructed railways, damns, bridges and communication networks.  What was so attractive of coffee production was the land that it was on.  The indigenous people of Guatemala inhibited the land where most of this production took place, this then caused a land distribution that enabled people to buy the land and pay a certain tax.  These taxes were too high for mostly all the indigenous people that once had occupied the land.  The argument Yashar makes is that the market of this time guided the division of the indigenous, and authoritarian rule remained. 

            In the book Yashar argues the point that historical context does push countries into authoritarian rule but what really influences this decision are precise moments where the country can reconfigure power. Yashar does a great job in making it clear that historical context is not the only factors in which countries either turn to democracy or to authoritarianism. What is most related to my paper is how she explains coalitions.   One of the conditions that Yashar analyzes is coalition.  They are defined as alliances among social sectors or groups.  Who sides with whom, against whom, and over what.  This important to my research because I talk a lot about how people were grouped in Guatemala.  What is most important within this book to my research is the critical point where Guatemala turns into a military rule and Costa Rica turns to a democratic rule in the face of the cold war where both countries tried to overthrow reforms. 

            Yashar argues that in order to endure a democracy it is not just the masses nor just the elite that need to challenge the regime.  It is necessary that the elite is divided and that they support the masses.  Elites hold the power within he society so if they are happy with the regime it is unlikely that there will be a change.  Yashar explains the October revolution within Guatemala, where military and the masses joined together to overthrow the 13 year dictatorship of Ubico.  They were successful in the overthrow but when new political parties came together, they were weak and crumbled from within.  The fourth and last postulate is an argument for civil society.  Yashar argues that in order to have and enduring democracy you also need to have a society that has developed normalized set of practices.  Such as compromise, social trust and participation.  The argument for civil organization allows democratization less threatening to the elite and allows for a coalition between the two groups.  Within the postulates Yashar articulates what is necessary for a democratic regime.  This is what outlines the differences from Guatemala and Costa Rica and why are they are so different today.  These outlines allow us to have an overall set of standards that Yashar believes holds the democratic construct together.