Drug Legalization, Elite Support, and Government Effectiveness in Latin America

In Latin America, the legalization of drugs—where it occurred—has been driven mainly by elites, although much attention has been placed on public opinion. Considering that efforts toward legalization have been top-down, analysis should concentrate on opinions of the governing elites. To undertake such an analysis, we draw on data from surveys conducted in 18 Latin American parliaments (2012–2018), and we examine elite perspectives on the legalization of all drugs. Results from a Bayesian hierarchical logistic analysis show that in countries where the government is less effective, and where public health problems persist, legislators are less likely to support legalization. We argue that this is due to a lack of trust by MPs in legalization as a solution to trafficking. Wherever those concerned with drug trafficking see the current government as problematic, they will be less likely to support so challenging and complex a policy as drug legalization.

Juvenile Criminality: Evidence From Prisoners in Two Brazilian States

The aim of this article is to identify the socioeconomic context that can influence young peoples’ decision to engage in crime. The sample is composed of youngsters (aged between 18 and 23 years old) convicted or detained in an interim regime accused of property crimes, serving a sentence in Brazilian prison units. A survey with 302 respondents was conducted in Paraná and Rio Grande do Sul states. Logistic regression models reveal that a young people’s family composition, use a firearm, be motivated by the idea of easy gain, have a favorable attitude toward drug legalization, and consume alcohol—all factors contribute to an increased probability of the young person engage in crime. This article finalizes with a discussion of the results and policy implications.

Divisive Topics as Social Threats

The current work provides evidence for a psychological obstacle to the resolution of divisive social issues (e.g., affirmative action, drug legalization); specifically, people approach discussions of these issues with a threatened mindset. Across three studies, it is shown that the prospect of discussing topics which divide social opinion is associated with threatened responding (the dissensus effect). Divisive discussion topics are associated with both a greater level of self-reported threat (Studies 1 & 3) and a greater tendency to perceive neutral faces as threatening (Study 2). Furthermore, the effect is shown to be robust across manipulations of social opinion (ratings of multiple social issues in Studies 1 & 2; fictional polling data in Study 3), and was not reducible to individual attitude extremity (Studies 1 and 3) or a valence effect (Study 2).