Theme Panel: Confronting Crime and Violence: Societal Responses and Democratic Implications

July 23, 2025 APSA Annual Meeting, Theme Panels Comments Off on Theme Panel: Confronting Crime and Violence: Societal Responses and Democratic Implications

In-Person Full Paper Panel

Participants:

  • (Chair) Omar Garcia-Ponce, George Washington University
  • (Discussant) Isabel Laterzo-Tingley, University of Texas, Austin
  • (Discussant) Regina A. Bateson, University of Colorado – Boulder

Session Description:

Crime and violence pose significant challenges to democratic governance. In many Global South countries, the relationship between insecurity and democracy presents a paradox: as crime and violence threaten citizens’ basic rights, societal responses to these threats can themselves imperil democratic institutions. When faced with persistent insecurity, public demands for swift action can put democracy at risk. For example, citizens may take justice into their own hands, normalize or resort to violence, or support authoritarian leaders who promise security at any cost, even at the expense of democratic freedoms. This panel explores how societies respond to crime and violence, investigating the implications of these responses for democratic institutions, values, and behavior. Drawing on diverse cases and methodological approaches, the papers shed light on how citizens and communities adapt to, resist, and sometimes perpetuate violence within contexts of insecurity.

Using original survey data, Barham and García-Ponce uncover gendered patterns of normalization of violence among youths in the context of Mexico’s drug war, suggesting that prolonged exposure to criminal violence may hinder the development of democratic norms and values in gender-specific ways. Bateson challenges conventional understandings of citizens’ responses to violence by reconceptualizing vigilantism as contentious politics rather than a mere response to state failure. This novel perspective reframes vigilante actions as efforts to build political power and achieve policy goals. The political dimension of vigilantism connects directly to Masullo, Krakowski, and Morisi’s finding that crime exposure in Brazil increases support for extralegal enforcement while leaving broader democratic commitments intact—suggesting that citizens strategically compartmentalize their support for democratic values. Similarly, García-Ponce and Rios-Figueroa provide experimental evidence that Mexican citizens maintain a commitment to democratic ideals despite ongoing security challenges, emphasizing that there is substantial variation in levels of democratic resilience across segments of society. Finally, the panel also addresses practical solutions for strengthening democratic responses to insecurity. Amat, Pinckney, and Henao’s field experiment on nonviolent action training in Venezuela demonstrates that civil society can be equipped with tools to advance democratic change even under severe repression. This finding suggests that appropriate institutional support and training can help channel societal responses to insecurity in ways that reinforce, rather than undermine, democratic values.

Collectively, these papers deepen our understanding of societal responses to crime and violence and the risks they pose to democracy. While the persistence of violence threatens democratic norms and institutions, the papers show that citizens often demonstrate unexpected resilience in their commitment to democracy. By examining both the challenges and opportunities arising from different societal responses to violence, this panel also provides valuable insights for policymakers and practitioners seeking to strengthen democratic institutions in the face of security threats.