Matthew Cleary and Susan Stokes set out to challenge the notion that interpersonal trust is essential to the creation and nurturing of democracy. The concepts of social capital and civil society—traced from Alexis de Toqueville through Gabriel Almond and Sydney Verb to Robert Putnam and other current scholars—posit that such trust facilitates civic engagement, reciprocity and activism (including participation in organizations) and that these elements combine to enhance the accountability of governments, which is the sine qua non of a properly functioning democratic regime. Democracy and the Culture of Skepticism is a frontal attack on the central premises of social capital theorists. It argues that mature democratic communities are more likely to be characterized by “people occupying themselves with private pursuits” (xi) than by civic engagement and that, in such an environment, scepticism is more likely than trust to help democracy take root and thrive.
The book is empirically based on case studies and the analysis of data derived from surveys conducted at the state level in Mexico (Baja California, Chihuahua, Michoacán, and Puebla) and Argentina (Misiones, Buenos Aires, Córdoba, and Mar del Plata). The survey data are marshalled—mostly in chapters 4 and 5—to examine comparatively a number of questions by state within each country and between the two countries. The authors take pain to point out the limitations of their survey data, noting that such regional comparisons do not allow for a comparison of Mexico and Argentina without confirmation using national samples.
Chapter 4 examines questions of trust (in institutions and in politicians), probes the extent of clientelism (the extent of personalized relations between respondents and parties, including “minor material support”), unpacks the relationship between elections, trust and accountability (whether political support derives from clientelism, party platform, or the party's concern for voters) and analyzes the attitudinal correlations between democracy, contingent consent and the rule of law (the extent to which citizen conformity to laws and publicly sanctioned informal rules corresponds to levels of democracy in the region).
Chapter 5 seeks to explain the variance in both the pace of democratization and the depth of democratic values in both countries. To test the social capital explanation, the survey probed involvement in civic organizations and levels of interpersonal trust and searched for a correlation between high levels of civic engagement and institutional trust, including willingness “to comply with the burdensome demands of the government” (130). The results directly confound social capital theory, showing that, in fact, people in the least democratic regions were “more active in civic associations, met more frequently, collaborated more to solve common problems and went to church more regularly” (163). In exploring alternative explanations, the authors found little support for the conventional cause-and-effect argument about economic development, income equality and democracy either. Indeed, their data led the authors to conclude that “economic development and income equality only modify the political culture once democracy has become well established” (164).
The amount of data presented in this section is impressive as is the ability of the authors to massage the data to permit the examination of a striking number of complex questions. Even better, a lot of statistical detail is included in tables, allowing readers to explore for themselves the linkage between evidence and conclusion. Finally, the authors' familiarity with the nuances of the politics of Latin America—evident throughout the book—clearly informs their careful treatment of the complex relationships under analysis.
For all of the outstanding strengths of the empirical analyses, the connection between the subjective and the objective is sometimes weakly developed or explained. The survey data reveal what respondents believe to be true, but in too many cases there is no independent confirmation that those beliefs are, in fact, accurate. For example, the section “Trust in Institutions and Trust in Politicians” is able to claim a correlation between levels of democracy and institutional trust, that is, respondents in more democratic regions are more likely to attribute good government performance to institutional controls, whereas respondents in less democratic regions are more inclined to credit the trustworthiness of politicians. This correlation does not really demonstrate causation, however. Respondents in more democratic regions are clearly more sceptical of their politicians and more trusting of their institutions but it does not necessarily follow that such scepticism promotes the development of more robust institutional watchdogs. Correlation does not equal causation.
A second (relatively minor) shortcoming is that, although alternative explanations of data tend to be well-treated, the authors don't seem to consider the possibility that interpersonal trust (social capital) and scepticism about politicians and political processes might co-exist quite peaceably within the hearts and minds of individual citizens, and that such a combination might do more to strengthen democratic political culture than either element on its own.
In the end, Cleary and Stokes were surprised by the strength of regional political cultures as an explanatory variable that transcends factors such as clientelism, poverty and inequality. Notwithstanding the enormous contribution this book makes to our understanding of all of the issues examined, there is no totally satisfactory explanation for the independent effects of region. Since the many important studies of civic culture and democratization from other jurisdictions do not figure prominently in this analysis, future scholars might consider bringing together the results of this research and some of those studies.
On the whole, Democracy and the Culture of Skepticism succeeds. It is an important (and impressive) piece of research that is a “must read” for all those interested in democratization, trust, institutional confidence and social capital.
