Slavery, Political Attitudes and Social Capital: Evidence from Brazil

To what extent, if any, does social capital contribute to the democratic formation of citizens´attitudes? It is a major influence among several others or just a minor one when it comes to forming political attitudes? This paper provides an empirical answer to these questions, drawing from the 2010 European Social Survey questionnaire. Its first section includes a discussion about the quality of democarcy in the culturalist approach of Political Science. The following section addresses the operationalization of the concept of quality of democracy and its main dimensions, with particular attention to social accountability. It then seeks to relate the concepts of social accountability as a pivotal dimension of the quality of democracy and social capital as formulated By Robert Putman. We used a multivariate regression analysis to test our hypotheses, which focus on whether the components that make up social capital have a differentiated impact on the formation of political attitudes, i.e. on the degree of satisfaction with democracy and trust in political institutions in old and new democracies.Key-Words: Quality of Democracy, Social Accountability, Social Capital, Satisfaction with Democracy, Trust in Political Institutions.

Download Full-text

What Determines Social Capital? Evidence from Slavery’s Legacy in the United States and Brazil

Social Forces ◽

10.1093/sf/soz116 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 98 (4) ◽

pp. 1773-1800

Author(s):

Matthew J Uttermark

Keyword(s):

United States ◽

Social Capital ◽

Political Attitudes ◽

Interpersonal Trust ◽

Economic Inequality ◽

The United States ◽

Negatively Associated ◽

Plantation Slavery

Abstract What determines social capital? Prior scholarship has examined what causes social capital to change contemporaneously but has yet to assess how history influenced social capital’s development. Building on previous research, which posits that former slaveholding regions exhibit lower levels of social capital, I test two competing explanations of how social capital developed. The inequality hypothesis argues that a reliance on plantation slavery created economic inequality, which in turn diminished modern social capital; the attitudinal hypothesis argues that the abolition of slavery influenced mass political attitudes, which have transmitted over generations and diminished modern social capital. To test which is correct, I examine slavery’s impact on social capital, measured as interpersonal trust, in two countries—the United States and Brazil. I find evidence that slavery is negatively associated with social capital; an individual’s support for interpersonal trust can decrease by as much as 18 percent in regions with high levels of former slavery. Moreover, it is the attitudinal hypothesis—not economic inequality—which associates with social capital’s decline.

Download Full-text