However, we have countless cases around the world whereby democratic countries tend to be unstable, beset by cycles of conflicts while those that are led by despots seems to be enjoying relative peace. For instance, drug lords are virtually taking over some Southern American countries such as Guatemala and Mexico, making parts of those countries insecure even though free elections, a key demand for democracy, are held regularly. Clearly, the democratic governments in most of these countries have failed to enhance security in their states. On the other hand, countries lambasted for having failed the democratic test such as Cuba and swathes of nations in the Arab world, never known to hold elections to choose leaders, are relatively calm with very low levels of crime.
Different stories and experiences of popular culture, with the backup from various academic and non academic sources will be analyzed to determine whether it is possible for a country to have stability and democracy at the same time. Democracy will undoubtedly cause tensions as the minorities cry foul over lack of opportunities. These tensions can be a major source of instability. Is it therefore possible to have both stability and democracy if the minorities are unhappy?
Popular culture can be broadly defined as the aggregate of cultural products such as music, art, literature, fashion, dance, television and film that is primarily consumed by the non-elite portion of the society (Crossman; Osborn 3). Non-elitist group of the society are mainly the downtrodden or the masses that does not control both the political as well as the economic power. These are the laborers, the middle class and the lower class of the society.
According to Crossman, popular culture can be viewed from two dimensions. First, popular culture is a tool used by the elites to control the masses. This is because the elites tend to control media outlets and the culture itself. For