As celebrations to mark the bicentenary of independence from Spain take place, what does it take to consolidate democracy in the Latin American region? Only 30 years ago when transition processes started no one foresaw the present challenges. Democratization in the region has been slow and heterogeneous. Although citizens acknowledge that there have been some positive changes, so far these have been insufficient to achieve the kind of transformation in governance or social and economic structures that would help consolidate democracy. In fact, societies have evolved politically and economically, sometimes considerably, but they have not been transformed. More striking is the perception of democracy as being unresponsive and elitist.

Increasing discontent in Latin America in spite of five years of sustained growth between 2002 and 2007 highlights the core of the challenges the region is facing insofar as it brings a new type of inequality: the distribution of the benefits of progress. The region faces today not only the historical inequality of sheer poverty which the population has stoically endured for centuries, but the new inequality that development brings. Far from being democratic, progress and modernity come with a filter, yet again discriminating against the underprivileged in society, widening the gap between the haves and the have nots. A steady 90 per cent of the population in the past decade considers that there is an unfair distribution of wealth. Indeed, Latin America has been able to "recover from the past", namely the levels of poverty of the 1980s, a reminder that history does not necessarily bring nations forward, and that it has taken 28 years to recover from those levels.

"The region has gained with democratic rule a minimal guarantee of civil liberties"

The region has gained with democratic rule a minimal guarantee of civil liberties, a tool that these 18 societies are using to push for more democracy. With higher levels of education and perception of rights than ever before we find more critical citizens who in turn expect more of democracy. Simultaneously negative consensus is overwhelming: consensus on the lack of social and economic guarantees that democracy has not been able to produce; consensus on the unsolved basic conflicts in society, between rich and poor, between entrepreneurs and workers, etc.; consensus on the unequal distribution of wealth, progress and development.

Mexican peasants were reported as saying after independence, some 200 years ago, that "It is just another priest in a different mule" referring to change of power from one oligarchy (Spaniards) to another (whites). Universal suffrage, in the democratic third wave, has brought the possibility of changing "the priest" and keeping "the mule". Finding the right successor to the priest — namely, political leadership that can deliver the expected social and economic improvements — is the first and foremost task. Political conflict and instability may be necessary to achieve these societal transformations, and thus ultimately to secure democracy among increasingly critical and expectant populations. Things necessarily need to get worse in many cases before they get better, because the transformation that is needed is not only possible through reform, but also through rebirth. This is the case of Bolivia, Ecuador, and we will probably see similar patterns en Paraguay, following the alternance in power that has taken place.

The good news is that "the people" are finding novel channels to express their demands beyond the representational weakness of political parties. Spontaneous unorganized protest unguided by political organizations is a new phenomenon. Critical, empowered citizens are the result of 30 years of undemocratic democratic rule. A second independence with a full, functioning democracy will be achieved insofar as their critical citizens are pushing for transformation of their societies into democratic ones.

"The Latin American population has no misunderstanding about what should lie at the end of the tunnel (democratic prosperity)"

Above all, democracy is a promise of liberty, a mix of political and socioeconomic goods that allow each and everyone the right to choose, to be in charge of one's own life. The Latin American population has no misunderstanding about what should lie at the end of the tunnel (democratic prosperity); this is what keeps the vast majority clinging to democracy. For many who observe the region with the eyes of the past, there is a normative problem with the legitimacy of institutions, while for those who live in the region the problem lies with the legitimacy of the exercise of power. Those who hold power and exercise it in their interest have to be made accountable. Barriers have to be known and transparent; reward for effort has to be recognizable.

The future must not depend on where you were born or the colour of your skin, and the production of public goods has to be recognizable for the vast majority of the population. Legitimacy of institutions is a function of all of the above, trust in unknown third parties depends on equal treatment, fairness of access and process.

As Albert Hirschman put it, people will not delay their passion in favour of their interest and nations will only sit face to face after having been at each other's throat for a prolonged period of time, they cannot beat their opponent and must negotiate a peaceful understanding.

The construction of democratic societies has a necessary path of being at each other's throat before sitting down to resolve a conflict. At present, some societies are only starting that process, such as Bolivia and Ecuador and others, such as Paraguay, will be in the near future. Others still are already sitting face to face: Brazil, Chile and Mexico.

Negotiations are taking place to reset each other's place in the newly structured societies. These new structures have to make room for minorities, different races, languages and a plurality of views and ideas. Political party systems are only starting to reflect the need for these changes that lie ahead. Alternance in power is taking place after many decades of single-party rule such as in Mexico, Uruguay and Paraguay or white rule such as the case of Bolivia. Not less significant is access by women to political office that demonstrates a demand for change in Chile and Argentina for very different reasons.

History has shown that societies achieve profound transformation through war and/or revolution, yet Latin America´s recent events show that transformation is taking place in a series of small crisis that are more profound than simple reforms, but less violent than war and revolution.