86
Marcus gustafsson
(Linz & Stepan 1996: 24). Thus the West German consolidation process
was arguably reinforced by greater levels of public homogeneity.
Conclusion
This article has sought to provide a comparative framework for theories
of democratic consolidation, and it has used this to examine why West
Germany experienced a much smoother democratic consolidation after
the Second World War than Mexico has more recently. As can be seen
from the literature reviewed above, the dichotomy between structure and
agency explanations has had a clear presence among the theoretical discussions in this field. This article opts for a middle ground by utilising
two separate avenues of comparison: ‘political commitment’ and ‘public
commitment’. It further adds to the literature by arguing that public commitment is assisted by a higher degree of ‘public homogeneity’, which
then excludes the risk of minority opposition, exclusion and potential
insurgency, as occurred in Mexico during the 1990s.
Neither Mexicans nor Germans expressed strong political values, impressive education rates or strong political participation, even though
communications infrastruct ure and the availability of information in
Mexico are relatively robust. Yet, in stark contrast to Mexico, Germany experienced strong economic growth and benefited from substantial
public homogeneity, clearly strengthening its public commitment. Furthermore, the German political commitment far outweighs its Mexican
counterpart, and the German political elite also sought to strengthen public opinion through re-education.
Thus, while both countries initially sustained lukewarm levels of public
commitment, it is clear that the stronger political commitment ensured a
solid and smooth consolidation process in Germany. This was arguably
further eased by strong economic growth during the relevant period. In
Mexico, there should be a critical focus on strengthening the political