Do Populists really “clean the house”? Corruption and Populism in contemporary Latin America.

This paper explores the intricate relationship between populism and anti-corruption in Latin America, recognizing the profound impact both phenomena have on good governance. A common assumption is that populism undermines good governance, fostering corruption, but this oversimplification requires critical examination. If we categorize Corruption and Populism as problems, they should likely be termed “Wicked Problems” (Rittel & Weber, 1973), complex issues defying straightforward solutions and sometimes treated as enduring “syndromes” (loosely using Johnston's (2005) concepts). The paper frames corruption as a complex system, delving into the interconnectedness of political, economic, and social factors contributing to corruption in Latin America. It seeks to verify how populist leaders exploit this complexity for their benefit. Latin America traditionally grapples with populism and governance challenges, with corruption often considered a systemic issue. Comparing populist and non-populist governments in Latin America regarding corruption offers a nuanced perspective on how different political approaches impact corruption levels. The term "populism" is multifaceted, encompassing various ideologies and practices, with definitions ranging from anti-establishment rhetoric to people vs. elite confrontation. Utilizing Mudde & Kaltwasser (2007), Laclau (1977), and Taggart (2000) as guides, the paper aims to create a comprehensive database rooted in Latin American history and reality. The analysis considers specific government characteristics and the broader socio-political context. To systematically examine the populism-corruption relationship, the paper proposes a dichotomous variable representing populism, following methodologies used by Ruth-Lovell, Lührmann & Grahn (2019), Ruth (2018), and Meyer (2023). Given diverse definitions of populism and corruption, the paper aims to respect consensus while exploring variations. This approach allows the use of multiple corruption indexes, comparing perceptions and objective measures such as CPI and T-Index, Control of Corruption, to identify correlations and potential causality. The populist discourse often centers on fighting a “corrupt elite” at the expense of the “people.” The paper verifies the prevalence of corruption in the region through various indexes and quantitatively examines, via panel data analysis, the hypothesis that populist rule contributes to the deterioration of anti-corruption efforts and institutions in Latin America. Some cases, like Brazil or Peru, reveal that corruption was a prominent campaign rhetoric component, yet anti-corruption efforts were not prioritized when these governments assumed power. Comparing populist and non-populist governments in Latin America regarding corruption provides insight into how different political approaches impact corruption levels. The paper scrutinizes factors influencing the effectiveness of populist anti-corruption initiatives, including selective targeting, erosion of institutional integrity, challenges to the rule of law, media control, and the long-term impact on governance. By considering the nuanced interplay between populist governance and corruption, this study contributes to a comprehensive understanding of the complexities inherent in populist anti-corruption endeavors and their implications for institutional stability.