Analysis: A recent Unimer survey commissioned by the national newspaper La Nacion reveals that the average Costa Rican is disgusted with his government and his revulsion and impatience is taking a drastic turn.

The danger of this dim view is expressed most strongly in the question asked, “In some circumstances, an authoritarian government can be preferable to a democratic one.”

In 2006, only 10% of those polled said yes. Last month, 22% said yes. This, in a country that has traditionally been democratic and was fiercely proud of it.

Just to make sure of the trend, pollsters asked, “Democracy is preferable to any other form of government.” In 2006, 78% agreed. This year the number dropped to 57%.

Latins have a disturbing tendency to grow hasty, following any politician who promises a quick fix to cure all the voters’ problems if they hand that politico the authority to do so. The extreme example of this was Francisco Franco in Spain during the 1930s.

Franco did so, not by using democracy against itself, but by armed rebellion. But he attracted enough followers to win a long, bloody civil war. That country had to endure decades of repression under his heel thereafter.

Of course, then Fascism was the flavor of the month — or rather, the flavor of the decade. Then it was communism, now a sort of neo-communism represented by Daniel Ortega in Nicaragua and Hugo Chavez of Venezuela.

All were elected in a reaction to the corruption of their predecessors. But, in the case of Nicaragua, they were willing to try anything since they had no experience with democracy. They felt, as in the case of Ticos (13%) in the latest poll, that to the average person, the form of government really didn’t matter.

Certainly, anger against corruption is understandable. But this has more to do with the personalities of the people elected than the form of government. To use an old cliché, there is a tendency to throw the baby out with the bathwater.

As countries in Latin America have taken on the trappings of democracy, Costa Rican pride in managing the sometimes unwieldy machinery of a republic for far more than a century has declined.

Materialism also plays a part in this dangerous trend. In 2006, 26% thought economic development was most important for a country. Last month, the figure was 35%, although that could be a reaction to the world economic meltdown.

But the 51% in 2006 who thought democracy the most important has declined to 45%, still high but far from the opinion of the last century. The number who think both are nearly equal importance has declined from 22% to 18%.

There appears ambivalence when it comes to the role of political parties. In 2006, 71% of the populace disagreed with the idea of a democracy without parties; six years later the figure is 54%, although only one in 10 are certain parties are the devil of the scenario and 34% are uncertain.

(The uncertainty may be caused by awareness that, except for a visionary plan put forth by the Baha’i Faith, no one has yet proposed such a plan and no one has tried it on a national basis.)

All this should tell politicians to clean up their act. Corruption and government inaction leads to discord and a thirst for perilous solutions. Politicians who feel that, if they shave a little off the edges to feather their own nests it doesn’t hurt, are dead wrong.

The age of politics as usual had better end, or the children of Costa Ricans will pay a heavy price. There is an old joke of the slogan about a Texas politician — “Elect good ol’ Johnny Doe — he won’t steal, much.” That’s not funny any more.