Latin America's ethical crisis erodes trust in institutions, commentary says

Chilean academic proposes ‘pandemethics’ to describe spread of moral decay

The commentary, published by United Press International, argues that institutional failures become more corrosive when citizens believe they result from favoritism or dishonesty rather than misfortune or honest error. “Inequality wounds more deeply when privilege appears to determine who receives justice; institutional failure becomes explosive when no one accepts responsibility for it,” Cantero wrote.

Cantero proposed the term “pandemethics,” combining pandemic and ethics, to describe what he called a deterioration of moral and civic standards that spreads through society, crossing boundaries between public and private life. “Like a virus, it does not remain confined to one institution,” he wrote. “It moves through government, business, education and culture, growing wherever misconduct is rewarded and citizens begin to assume that ethical behavior places them at a disadvantage.”

The commentary identified three dynamics driving the phenomenon. The first, cross-sector infection, occurs when influence-peddling and favoritism become routine, making misconduct appear as an expected route to advancement. The second, social fever, describes citizen protests that signal a society attempting to defend itself against deeper disorder. The third, the corruption of principles themselves, occurs when political actors invoke ideals they do not practice or use moral language to disguise the pursuit of power.

The broader data supports the argument. Transparency International’s 2025 Corruption Perceptions Index, published in February 2026, found that the global average score had fallen to 42 out of 100, its lowest level in more than a decade. More than two-thirds of the 182 countries measured scored below 50. The region, the watchdog said, has made no progress against corruption, with organized crime increasingly penetrating politics and public institutions in countries such as Mexico, Colombia and Brazil.

Alongside these findings, the 2025 Edelman Trust Barometer found that 61% of respondents worldwide held a moderate or high sense of grievance, believing that governments and businesses served narrow interests and allowed the wealthy to benefit unfairly. Four in 10 considered at least one form of hostile activism acceptable, including threats, deliberate disinformation or damage to property.

Latinobarómetro’s most recent regional survey described democracy in Latin America as resilient, with support beginning to recover after a difficult decade. Cantero argued that both findings can be true — citizens may still prefer democracy while doubting that leaders and institutions serve them fairly.

“The greatest danger to democracy is not always its outright rejection,” Cantero wrote. “It is the gradual conviction that elections change little, that institutions protect the powerful, and that public office has become detached from the common good.”

Cantero, a Chilean academic at the International University of La Rioja and author of “Digital Society: Reason and Emotion,” argued that legal and institutional reforms are necessary but insufficient. “Rules alone cannot restore democratic life,” he wrote. “Every system depends on people willing to honor not only the letter of the law but also the responsibilities that accompany public power.”

He pointed to an imbalance in how integrity is demanded: political parties invoke it mainly against opponents, public appointments reward loyalty over competence, and civic education rarely treats citizenship as carrying responsibilities. The same pattern appears beyond government, he said, with business leaders, journalists and civil society organizations demanding integrity from the state while excusing favoritism or dishonesty within their own institutions.

“Rebuilding that confidence will take institutional reform and economic opportunity,” Cantero wrote. “But it will also take ethical consistency between what leaders promise and how they govern. Until that gap closes, even functioning institutions will struggle to earn the trust democracy needs to survive.”