This article explores growing support for mano dura (iron-fist) policies in four historically safe Latin American democracies: Chile, Costa Rica, Ecuador, and Uruguay. Through 32 focus groups with 259 participants, we find that mano dura narratives are popular, but cross-national variations are sharp. Ecuador shows the strongest support for extreme, often extralegal measures, whereas participants in Uruguay favor an institutional “law and order” approach. Chile and Costa Rica occupy a middle ground, with contested trust in mano dura. We argue that two factors condition the intensity and form of support: (1) perceptions of institutional fragility and (2) the availability of social scapegoats—dynamics embedded within deeper historical legacies. These comparative findings reveal a reality with implications beyond Latin America: insecurity can fuel mano dura’s appeal even in stable democracies, but robust institutions can curb its most extreme manifestations.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Cutrona et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: