A Desultory Defense of Democracy: OAS Resolution 1080 and the Inter-American Democratic Charter

Levitt, Barry S.

doi:10.1111/j.1548-2456.2006.tb00357.x

Cited by 26 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The role of the mass protests and popularity ratings of the president might also matter, which aligns with the role of domestic explanations for OAS responses (Levitt, 2006). Popularity ratings in the single digits do not encourage presidents to continue to fight, against the will of the population, to remain in power.…”

Section: Case Studies: Venezuela 2014-2016 and Brazil 2016mentioning

confidence: 99%

Killing Democracy Softly: Executive Privilege and the Defense of Democracy in the Americas

Smith¹

2018

Latin American Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Is the Organization of American States a “club of presidents?” A review of democratic crises from 1990 to 2016 lends support to the argument that the organization can be considered as such. This article adds to the literature by noting that the severity of democratic crises in Latin America is a key factor in the response. When there is a severe threat to democracy, there is likely to be a response, regardless of the origin of the crisis. The origin matters more during low‐level threats; the organization is more likely to respond to low‐level threats to presidents. Meanwhile, when the threat is from the president, it is less likely there will be a response. The findings from this article provide support for continued evaluations of the defense‐of‐democracy regimes in the Americas and show the potential for executives to erode democracy slowly and over time without significant responses from the Organization of American States, leading to low‐quality democracies in the region.

show abstract

Section: Case Studies: Venezuela 2014-2016 and Brazil 2016mentioning

confidence: 99%

Killing Democracy Softly: Executive Privilege and the Defense of Democracy in the Americas

Smith¹

2018

Latin American Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This, in turn, helps illuminate the limitations of the theoretical constructs being applied and articulates explanations in terms of outcomes and variables. Concomitantly, propositions stating why the world is as it is can be derived from those accounts in order to be tested and verified (Smith 2008;Pastor 1991Pastor , 2001Evans 1989;Cottam 1994; see also Desch 1993;Cameron and Tomlin 2000;Borja Tamayo 2001;Levitt 2006). Furthermore, it is worth noting that 6.7 percent of the publications under review offer prescriptions; that is, statements about how the world should be.…”

Section: Research Objectives: On the Need To Theorize And Explain Morementioning

confidence: 99%

Scholarly Research on U.S.-Latin American Relations: Where Does the Field Stand?

Bertucci¹

2013

Lat. Am. polit. soc.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article draws on a new dataset to depict the scope, objectives, and methods of research in the field of U.S.-Latin American relations over the past quarter-century.The key findings are that the study of U.S.-Latin American relations focuses largely on foreign policy analysis, is mainly descriptive, relies overwhelmingly on qualitative methods, and is fairly detached from the main research trends in international relations. In light of this assessment, the article emphasizes the need to pay more attention to issues of theory development and explanation in this subfield of international relations.T his article focuses on, and presents an assessment of, the academic field of U.S.-Latin American relations. 1 The analysis, based on works published during the period 1989 to 2008, seeks to shed light on the empirical content, purpose, and methodology of research on U.S.-Latin American relations. It is concerned with three key questions about the contributions of this field of studies to knowledge: knowledge about what? knowledge for what? and how has knowledge been generated?The assessment is based on an analysis of journal articles published in 15 leading international relations (IR)

show abstract

“…A growing number of studies have suggested that the OAS record in terms of safeguarding democracy has been decidedly mixed or even worse (Arceneaux and Pion‐Berlin ; Boniface ; Legler , ; Levitt ; McCoy , ; McMahon and Baker ). Although they do not use the same language, implicit in these analyses is the idea that efforts to construct an effective governance architecture with real authority have been problematical.…”

Section: An Effective and Durable Sphere Of Authority?mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Where international or transnational analysis is concerned, those who have analyzed Inter‐American democracy promotion have tended to concentrate implicitly on diverse pieces of the “global governance puzzle” (Mingst and Arreguín‐Toft ), but in an ad hoc , piecemeal way. For example, various authors have focused their analysis on regime construction (Legler ; Legler and Tieku ; Levitt ), norm diffusion (McMahon and Baker ), legalization (Hawkins and Shaw ), and the role of civil society (Hawkins ).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Shifting Sands of Regional Governance: The Case of Inter‐American Democracy Promotion

Legler

2012

Politics & Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article evaluates the limits and possibilities of Inter-American democracy promotion through the application of a five-part governance framework: the nature of the problem, governance architecture, the actor set, the construction of a sphere of authority, and contextual factors. I argue that the ability of the Organization of American States (OAS) to promote and defend democracy effectively has been hampered by a series of important changes in context: the structure of power, material conditions, regionalism, and ideology and discourse. The conditions that originally fostered the creation of an Inter-American defense of democracy regime during the 1990s have been largely replaced in the new millennium by strong impediments to the consolidation of this issue area as a sphere of authority. Unless the OAS acquires more stable contextual foundations, the future of Inter-American democracy promotion will remain highly problematic.

show abstract

A Desultory Defense of Democracy: OAS Resolution 1080 and the Inter-American Democratic Charter

Cited by 26 publications

References 22 publications

Killing Democracy Softly: Executive Privilege and the Defense of Democracy in the Americas

Killing Democracy Softly: Executive Privilege and the Defense of Democracy in the Americas

Scholarly Research on U.S.-Latin American Relations: Where Does the Field Stand?

The Shifting Sands of Regional Governance: The Case of Inter‐American Democracy Promotion

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About