Various Assignments - Essay Example

Download file to see previous pages Evidence suggests that while it may be true that democracies do tend to inject greater public funds into the provision of services to the public, these contributions do not always result in funds directly benefiting the poor. The injection of larger sums into public services by democracies also does not correspond with desired social results in terms of “longer, healthier, or more productive lives” (Ross, 2006, p. 860). As Ross (2006) points out:
If democracy produces better outcomes for low-income families, then countries that transit from autocratic to democratic rule should see improvements in their infant and child mortality rates. In general, they do not (p. 860).
It would therefore appear that for the purposes of reducing poverty and improving the lives and the wellbeing of the poor, democracy is not a viable option. Democracy is not a viable option because the evidence suggests that democracy has not been successful in reducing poverty and improving the lives of the poor any better than non-democracies.
Mandelbaum (2007) also argues that democracy is not always a viable option for all nations. In particular Mandelbaum (2007) specifically points out that countries with socialist economies are incompatible with democracies. This is because a primary element of democratic states is that it imposes restrictions on government authority. In this regard, the greater the level of socialism, the more difficult it will be in “establishing a functioning democracy” (Mandelbaum, 2007, p. 95).
Countries with free and open market economies will be compatible with democracy (Mandelbaum, 2007). On the other hand, countries with “economic organization” and/or socialist economies are incompatible with democratic political systems that recognize and enforce individual freedoms and open and free government elections (Mandelbaum, 2007). Even so, it is conceivable that not ...Download file to see next pagesRead More