The Concept of Democracy: Institutions and Processes of Democratization - Essay Example

The most essential factors for the emergence and maintenance of democracy Introduction Generally, democracy isa concept that can be looked at in many ways. However, due continued modernisation, the view of democracy has changed with different cultures viewing democracy in different ways. For democracy to exist, several factors must be met. They include factors that foster emergence and maintenance of democracy. These factors are what constitute to divergent views on what is critical in transition and maintenance of democracy. Economic development and non economic factors forms the basis of the argument on which factors are essential for emergence and maintenance of democracy. Economic development is the most important for emergence of democracy on the basis of what economic development entails (Kanybek and Czap 2012). For instance, since economic development involves expansion of economic prosperity of a country for the welfare of its citizens, it supports institutions and processes of democracy. Conversely, non economic factors such as culture and media play a critical part in the maintenance of democracy as many people define or view democracy on the basis of how the government addresses their issues based on culture and the freedom of expressing their views. Perfect examples of counties that have realised democracy include the U.S and Indonesia. Part I Economic development as an essential for emergence of democracy Apparently, the relationship between economic development and democracy has being that of complexity and value. According to Knack et al. (2003), the highest level of a positive relationship between the two factors has continually been realized in the global economy with countries such as Indonesia and Brazil becoming illustrations to this concept. In an investigation carried out by Huntington (1991), it is obvious that development has incorporated economic indicators and freedom such as, political and human rights, transparency and social opportunities. Additionally, the study also stipulated that development laid its focus more on accountability, participation and other related elements that resulted to substantive forms of democracy. As such, scholars affiliated to this relationship have argued that democracy could be termed as the transformation of society that goes beyond economic growth. According to Ramaswamy and Cason (2003), democracy was more practical in countries that had high levels of social- economic development as opposed to those that has low levels of social- economic development. In light of this, the modernization theory stipulates that democratisation was as a result of transformation in class structure, development in economy, increased urbanization, development of democratic values, and other social and cultural aspects. As a result, democratic emergency become an event that was generated from within in reference to social and economic development. Similarly, the theory argues that the presence of democracy should be seen as the major determinant of a process that relates to modernization in the global economy. In reference to a research executed by Mattes (2001), it is obvious that most countries begin their democratic transition at a particular point making it unique in relation to how the world perceives them. Nevertheless, numerous expert have affirmed that economic development and related factors have played a huge role in the democratic transition in countries such as Indonesia. Basically, Indonesia is one of the numerous countries that illustrate the impact of economic development towards democracy. It has been documented that, the country was e experiencing economic crisis before it remarkably came up with a solution pertaining to gaining a momentum, which finally led to democratic freedom. It is believed that, during the beginning of the Asian financial crisis in 1997, the faults of Suharto’s policies of economy such as; debts, corruption, and non-interference corporate governance became exposed. As a result, Suharto’s regime of power was removed. According to Sharma (2007), democracy has a close relationship with economic development in that more prosperous countries have higher chances of experiencing sustainable democracy. Moreover, he articulates that there are numerous historical and sociological processes which have led to economic development eventually resulting to democracy. In this regard, economic development has been argued to continually facilitate democracy. In his thesis, Lipset articulated that there were variables related to economic development and its impact on democracy such as political culture, state and society relations, class structure and civil society. A study conducted by Choi (2007), affirmed on the four variables as the most unique in regard to economic development. To begin with, the variable of political structure contributes through economic development that is bound to bring forth democratic political culture as a result of increased education. Similarly, the study came up with a class structure variable that stipulated the growth of various social classes, and the migration the poor in rural areas to urban areas. Equally, there emerged new relationship between different classes, a situation that led to activation of democracy. As a matter of fact, economic development also contributed to political extremism practiced by a majority of people from the lower class exposing them to cross pressure in a society that was known to be complex. It is worth noting that, state and society were seen as a variable that was capable of being influenced by economic development in favour of the emergence of democracy. It was also concluded that economic development contributed to democracy by generating several organisations that were both voluntary and non voluntary. In another study conducted by, Kanybek and Czap (2012) declared institutions as factors of economic development. Basically, the concept makes more emphasis on starting with democracy to have economic development. In light of this, it has been pointed out that good institution performance has a close relationship with successful economic development. This close relationship has put more pressure on the need to continuously check the performance of governments and other public institutions by use of multilateral development institutions and non government agencies. For instance, World Bank has numerous programs and indicators that serve as agencies for monitoring governance. Of importance to note is that the approach of institutionalisation in economic development gives a comparative analysis about countries that are emerging (Garten 2000). Furthermore, the continuous success in the transition period that is aimed at democracy has been explained through their economic growth. Similarly, studies related to the impact of economic development particularly in political change have given suggestions on the relationship between the continuous increments of levels in the economic development and the openness associated with political success. Arat 1988 argues that for a continuous upward trend for economic development as a factor that lead to transition of democracy, policy makers should ensure that the potential for inclusive growth is unlocked through prioritising financial logistics for investment in infrastructure, renewable energy, ports and railroads. As a result, there will be regulated incidences on wealth and power concentration especially with autocratic ruling. According to World Savvy on Democracy around the world (2008), Przeworski and Lemongi in support of the modernisation theory argued through construction of a scale that was meant to predict the life expectancy of a democratic government in relation to per capital GDP, which was measured in U.S Dollars. They argued that countries with $ 1500 per capita GDP were likely to have their democracies lasting for 8 years. On the other hand, countries experiencing per capita GDP of $1500 to $3000 had a higher chance of democracies lasting up to 18 years. Of importance to note is that, the 1985 analysis gave assurance of good regime stability once countries were able to go beyond $6000 per capital level. Part II Non-economic factors are essential in maintenance of a democratic regime It is apparent that non economic factors play a great part in determining democracy path of any given country. A study conducted by Arazeem and Saka (2007) found out that whereas economic development is essential for democracy, non economic factors are necessary in order to have democracy maintained. This argument was supported by Obstfeld, et al. (2012) who noted that some non economic factors such as culture cannot be ignored especially on matters pertaining political path to take. Democracy encompasses the voice of the majority while the voice of the minority is not entirely ignored. Therefore, in situations where the majority feels that their issues are not addressed by the government in place, the spirit of democracy cannot be assured in such a situation. Some cultures have strong believes that pushes people from that culture to be affiliated to a certain political belief or individual. In addition, some cultures dictate the course of democracy dependent on their patriotism. However, this is all dependent on the kind of patriotism the group indentifies itself with. For instance, there is a group that has the type of patriotism based on an instinctive love while there is another group that bases their patriotism on reason and enlightenment. In light of this, the cultural group with patriotism based on enlightenment is more likely to be rational in their political decisions. Therefore, if they happen to be the majority, they have a chance of raising their concerns and correct the regime in power to widen democratic space. However, the group that base their patriotism on intrinsic love might not feel convinced to some developments that the regime proposes or executes. In addition, if the regime in power is their favorite as a result of the love they have for it, even if the regime does not deliver, they would not be in a position to question or correct it. Therefore, it is evident that culture is a crucial element in determining whether a democracy would persist or die. A study by Adegboye (2013) indicates that people’s satisfaction with democracy is highly dependent on people’s beliefs. For instance, even when there is continued development, they would only be satisfied with such developments if what they consider as the basis of their culture is met. For instance, the culture of the Americans has for a long time been in relation to the belief of the rule of law. The majority of the Americans advocate for due process of the law. This can be linked to discrimination, which has its root since the time of slavery. As such, the culture of justice for all has made the American governments to maintain democracy due to persistent call for equality among different racial groups in the U.S. In addition, a study conducted by Tolbert and Smith (2006) indicated that in most part of developing countries, democracy has not been consistent in majority of the countries as a result of strong cultural factors that limit the governments to continue with the spirit of democracy. For instance, due to the culture of political ethnicity, many governments get into power with the support of the majority that supports their ideologies and manifestos. However, if by any chance the government and its supporters have ethnic politics that tend to benefit only a small ethnic group, it is highly likely that even if the economic base of the country is good, the democracy will not persist for a long time. With such a concept, the issue of discrimination and oppression of the minority groups comes in. On the other hand, if the group that does not support the government, it is of the opinion that the regime is not doing the right thing, the chances of correcting such a government are high since the government may fear facing impingement. In another dimension, it is critical to point out that a country with diversified cultures has higher chances of maintain democracy (Andersen and Taylor 2008). The more the cultural groups, the more the demands are to the government. Therefore, the government has to be careful not to sideline some groups and favour others. Equality in such countries plays a part in ensuring that democracy is maintained by the government. This comes in as a result of people trying to find a common ground that every group feels catered for. For instance, there has been a tendency by the rich to oppress the poor in many ways. However, as the poor tries to fight for their rights, democracy is realised and maintained. Nevertheless, when the rich dominates the minority in regard to the positions they occupy in the government, there is a risk of discontinued democracy as the poor libels against the rich (Fernando 2011). Some of these instances have been witnessed in the Middle East where citizens have been in the fight for their rights and governments have been overthrown. In a broader spectrum, culture creates a division in regard to social classes. Some social classes believe in democracy while others do not believe in it. For instance, people in the lower classes believe that democracy is for people in upper class who enjoy protection and command the masses using their riches. The figure below illustrates concepts required for a democratic regime to survive. According to, Wucherpfennig and Deutsch (2009), alongside economic development that is necessary for consolidation of democracy, the impact of social mechanisms as outline by Marx is highly important. The issue of emergence of different social classes is argued to play a great part in dictating whether a democracy would survive or not. With continued modernization and emergence of different social classes’ role and culture, the most indispensable element of democracy consolidation is equality where socio-political factors must be put in place. Figure 1: Modernization Theory according to Lipset Source: Wucherpfennig, J. and Deutsch, F., 2009. Modernization and Democracy: Theories and Evidence Revisited. Retrieved from: http://democracy.livingreviews.org/index.php/lrd/article/viewarticle/lrd-2009-4/13 In another dimension, democracy is directly connected to change of social conditions of people. Different aspects of democratic process increase the receptiveness in regard to the type of norms and values that lessen conflict and support democratic regimes. Media The right to freedom of speech/expression including the freedom of press denotes that critical values of democracy. Tolbert and Smith (2006) argued that media plays an indispensable role is informing people. After democracy is developed, it is necessary to ensure continue check on performance of a democratic regime. In this regard, media plays a part in keeping such regimes on their toes by reporting on different accounts of misconduct. Many instances of corruption have been discovered and reported by media to the people. In addition, governments use media to communicate to their people. Some of the areas highlighted by media especially mass media include censuring authoritarian trends of regimes an politicians, negligence and questionable management practices of the government. However, while mass media checks on the government policies and their consequences, they have also the mandate of informing the public on alternative policies and how they can impact the country. Equally, alternative policies proposed by the opposition are well articulated upon and the same enlightened to the people. In addition, media puts across public opinion so as to enlighten the government on people’s voice. In the United States, news media has been critical in the American democracy (Przeworski and Limongi 1993). In fact, news media has continued to enjoy constitution protection in the U.S. In addition, media has been viewed by many Americans as a watchdog of the people. This has always put the government at task in ensuring that it delivers on its promises to people. In the 1990s, 87% of the Americans had at least one television set. Conclusion With many deliberations on the concept of democracy and factors that foster it, it is apparent that economic development is most essential in fostering its emergence while non economic fasters are most essential in its maintenance. Since democracy involves setting up of institutions and processes of democratisation, it is, therefore, evident that economic development is critical in support of democracy transition. In addition, after the emergence of democracy, people have to continue feeling that their welfare is well addressed by the government thus non economic factors become essential in the maintenance of democracy. Bibliography: Adegboye, A., 2013. Consolidating participatory democracy in Africa: the challenges and the way forward. European Scientific Journal, 9, (2), 241-251. Andersen, M. and Taylor, H., 2008. Sociology: understanding a diverse society. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning. Arat, F., 1988. Democracy and Economic development: Modernization theory revisited, Comparative Politics, 21, 1, 21-36. Fernando, A., 2011.Business environment. New Delhi: Pearson. Garten, J., 2000.World view: global strategies for the new economy. Boston, Mass.: Harvard Business School Press. Kanybek, N. and Czap, H., 2012. Corruption: Democracy, Autocracy, and Political Stability. Economic Analysis & Policy, 42 (1), 51-66. Arazeem, A. and Saka, L., 2007. Ethno-Religious and Political Conflicts: Threat to Nigeria Nascent Democracy. Journal of Sustainable Development in Africa 9 (3), 21-36. Knack, S et al., 2003. Democracy, governance, and growth. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. Obstfeld, M., et al., 2012. Global economic crisis: impacts, transmission and recovery. Cheltenham; Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar. Ramaswamy, S. and Cason, J., 2003. Development and democracy: new perspectives on an old debate. Hanover, NH; London: Middlebury College Press. Sharma, S., 2007. Achieving Economic Development in the Era of Globalization .Studies in Development Economics. New York, Routledge. Tolbert, C. and Smith D., 2006. Representation and direct democracy in the United States. Representation, 42 (1), 25-44. Przeworski, A. and Limongi, F., 1993. Political Regimes and economic growth. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 7 (3), 51-69. Read More