In the context of violence, the assumption that the democratic process serves its accountability function has recently come under fire. This presentation will argue that the aggregate evidence casting doubt on democratic accountability is misleading, as it assumes that coercion directly motivates increased support for the perpetrator. Responsible parties (whether incumbent governments or insurgency affiliated parties) are held accountable at the polls, but only by voters directly exposed to violence. In contrast, voters learning about violence from afar will punish governing parties only, when they fail to curb the violence. The analysis of two consecutive Peruvian elections held during the height of the civil war supports the story of discriminating electoral punishment, with important implications for our understanding of mobilization and political participation in conflicts.
For more information about this event please contact the Latin American Studies Center at email@example.com or 301-405-6459.