LatAm - Explaining the social unrest

What are the macro and socioeconomic trends, if any, that are fueling broad-based political instability in LatAm ? Could trends in income inequality, poverty, well-being, GDP per capita or the perception of corruption help explain the region’s recent unrest? Generally, the field of income distribution (the economic subfield dealing with inequality) points to a more economically active state as being an agent for greater equality, while a lesser state presence is associated with greater inequality. But, in the instances where government is given the power to be more active in economic life and execute on a policy agenda, the incidence of corruption often (and unsurprisingly) rises dramatically. Argentine voters came to terms with this expectation of corruption as long as the Peronist Party engineers a rebound in the country’s economic fortunes. But, for Mexico, Brazil and Peru, the populace seems most concerned with corruption. The unrest in Chile can be traced to the issues of economic inequities, a political class that is not representative of the broader population, and a litany of price fixing cases.