English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Zendy Plus

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Zendy Tools

Zendy Open

When trying to explain the success of democracy in the United States in 1831 Tocqueville used the comparative method in singling out the most important explanatory factors. He concluded that it were not the natural circumstances like absence of envious neighbors or the availability of natural resources which decided about success or failure of democratic institutions. According to Tocqueville, Latin America boasted the same favorable preconditions and yet he noted: “There are no nations upon the face of the earth ... more miserable than those of South America”. If we translate “customs” into the modern term of political culture we can see that Tocqueville’s explanation is still very much in currency in the social sciences. Indeed, historians of Latin America have frequently argued that the problem of the comparative underdevelopment of the region in part has to be explained by the resistance of traditional socio-cultural structures to modernization. According to this point of view, traditional attitudes and mentalities helped to perpetuate a political culture that proved an obstacle to democracy from the very start.

Pillars of the Republics: Early Monuments and the Politics of Memory in the Post-Colonial Americas