The Rise of Illiberal Democracy - Term Paper Example

The Article The article by Zakaria, “The Rise of Illiberal Democracy”, describes a very important political phenomenon in today’s world and recognizes clear differences between the political regimes of today. The article highlights the details and definitions of liberalism and illiberalism, liberal democracy and illiberal democracy, relates them to different examples, and explains each one in great detail. The author begins the article by quoting the words of American diplomat Richard Holbrooke, which he spoke at the time of the Bosnian election held in 1996; the author points out that the world is undergoing a phenomenon called illiberal democracy (Zakaria). The author thinks that two concepts are being confused, democracy and liberal democracy. Even though these terms apparently sound similar, in essence they are miles apart. Unfortunately, democracy is being practiced only in the structure and not in the function. Democracy is short-term, is only concerned about the present and, more importantly, about personal benefits, whereas liberal democracy is concerned about the future, a long-term orientation and the ultimate aims of improvement. In a very interesting manner, the article names illiberal democracy as a growing industry, which has flourished very quickly over the years. However, no illiberal democracy has been able to convert to a liberal democracy in spirit. Democracy concentrates more on the selection of government through free and fair elections, whereas a constitutional liberalism attempts to offer the due social political religious and economic rights to the people. Liberalism leads to democracy; democracy never leads to liberalism. Illiberal democracy is dangerous and unsafe for any country. Many countries in Europe have become successful liberal democracies; on the other hand, many countries in Asia such as Iran have only become dangerous democracies where elected governments control the lives and choices of people to a great extent. The author has emphasized the need to break practices like feudalism, personal interests, and centralization in Asian countries in order to reduce chaos in those countries and introduce liberalism. Furthermore, these countries should not have authorities like the police under them, which make them stronger than the people. Accepting the damages of anarchy, the author has tagged centralized and brutally strong states as more dangerous than anything else. If governments have extraordinarily high powers, they can also be misused for corrupt or immoral practices. Discussing ethnic conflict and war, the author uses the story of Jack Lang, highlighting two vital things to be noted. First, liberal democracies can handle ethnic confusions and war much more easily, and history has seen that the need to do that arises very seldom. On the other hand, immature democratic states are seen to be involved in ethnic and religious wars, civil wars and, ultimately, divided societies – on the basis of region, religion, caste or in the name of nationalism. Elections call for people’s support and in countries which are easily divided, it is easy to gain support on the basis of their weaknesses, such as religion or caste. After being elected conversely, the governments never fulfill their promises and work only for self-interest. According to the two scholars, democracy is not suitable for countries where strong ethnic preferences exist, such as Asian and African countries. In his book Ways of War and Peace, Michael Doyle says that it is impossible to achieve the peace-inducing qualities of democracy unless and until constitutional liberalism has been achieved first. The Article’s Definition of Democracy, Liberalism and Illiberalism Democracy in the article is defined simply as the selection of a democratic government through the process of free and fair elections. It is further divided into two categories, liberal and illiberal democracy. Liberalism literally means giving freedom to another person. In this context, liberalism in democracy refers to giving freedom of speech, choice, religion, clothes and life to the people of a country by an elected government. Illiberalism means restricting the choices of another person. Illiberal democracy is a dangerous form of democracy wherein a government restricts its people’s life by interfering in it in terms of choice, speech, actions, religion and even dressing. Comparison between Liberal Democracy and Illiberal Democracy A liberal democracy such as the USA calls for people’s support in order to secure future interests of the people and the country for betterment and fulfillment of long term goals. In liberal democracies, people are given freedom to speak, act, do and express their opinions in a flexible environment. An Illiberal democracy such as Iran tries to interfere in people’s lives and their way of living which includes even the way they dress. They are not given the authority of speech, freedom of thought and activity or freedom of expression. Why does Illiberal Democracy Lead to Civil War and Genocide? An illiberal democracy has crooked foundations, a division of the society on the basis of caste, culture, religion or sects. In such a society, it is very easy to create rifts and cause unrest; therefore illiberal democracy leads to civil war and genocide. Such societies are usually chaotic and have centralized power with the ‘so-called’ democratic government. This power can be easily misused to create chaos, naturally or unnaturally. Why do Liberal Democracies Avoid Civil War? How Does a Liberal Autocracy Lead to a Liberal Democracy (Egypt as an Example)? Liberal democracies attempt to give rights to their people and provide them with benefits: freedom of speech, action, and expression. Civil war occurs in chaotic situations when people are easily exploited by rulers and there is no unity and discipline. Such situations do not occur in liberal democracies because people are given their due rights and are satisfied. A liberal autocracy like Egypt till 2011 is an autocracy that follows principles of liberalism, which is the core need of a liberal democracy. The only thing missing in a liberal autocracy is an elected government. It is easy to switch from a liberal autocracy to a liberal democracy because the foundations of both these lie in the long-term benefit of the country. The only difference is an elected government. The Thoughts of Zakaria on the Rise of Democracy and Liberalism in Our Government (and my Opinion on his Thoughts) According to the article, the importance of liberalism has been highlighted many times because it is the foundation of democracy. Once liberalism is achieved, it becomes easy to achieve democracy. My opinion is almost similar to that of Zakaria, with a minor difference that liberalism was the first step and democracy was the next in the writing of our constitution (Zakaria). Which came first in the United States: Democracy or Liberalism? United States was one of the first few countries to fight for liberalism and achieve it, much owing to Roosevelt’s New Deal. Examples of liberalism in the US constitution include Social Security Act and Voting Rights Act, which ensured that rights of the people are not violated. Hence, liberalism was the first to enter the United States. The USA is considered to be an impure democracy. It is the process of running the country that is democratic in its nature. Civil Rights Movement   The civil rights movement took place in the USA between 1950 and 1980. This movement basically had a few main points about civil rights and the restoration which they needed to achieve. First of all, the movement aimed for equality of law. By equality of law was meant that the law of justice should apply to everyone regardless of their post, position, rank or status. This is considered to be a very important movement in the history of the United States as it helped gain very important results. It was a lasting movement and was consistent, due to which it gained popularity and the demands began to be fulfilled. Secondly, the movement demanded equal voting rights for everyone in order to ensure that each individual of the country has an equal say in how the county runs. A civil resistance movement was also launched under this campaign to pressurize the government for fulfilling the rights of the population (Adamson 54). The moveemnt also demanded ethnic equality for people of all castes, creeds, and religions. Liberalism and democracy had a great impact on this movement, particularly during this era, because it was due to this movement to a great extent that the Voting Rights Act and the Civil Rights Act were added to the American Constitution (Houck and Dixon 32). The movement greatly helped reduce civil barriers by bridging the gap beteen the masses and the government equally held responsible for any misusage of law of court. This movement was a very vital bookmark in ensuring that future geenrations do not have to worry about attaining equal rights, justice and equality in the court of law regardless of caste, creed, religion, culture and any other social, political or economic differences. The social and political differences were much highlighted. Thus, the success of the Civil Rights Moveemnt was a great addition to the US constitution, which now treats everyone with justice in the court of law regardless of gender, race, political position, religion or any other basis. Women’s Suffrage Movement At the end of the 19th century, a movement began which was about the rights of women to vote and participate in the political scenarios of the government of the United States. The movement was called the Women’s Suffrage Movement and resulted in the fifth amendment in the United States Constitution (Crawford 78). It was initially a very difficult step to obtain these rights from the government, but because of repeated and consistent efforts of women, especially their participation in the Second World War, they have been considered as deserving to have the right to vote in the country (Keller 67). After many efforts, initially only a limited amount of voting rights were given to women, which involved a certain quota of women who had the right to vote. The reaction of women, when they realized that they were not being treated as equals to the other gnder, was very fierce. It was said that men started to widely believe that America is not a democracy if it does not treat women as equal to men without any logical sense. There was huge opposition to the demands of women regarding equal voting rights which, were granted in steps. It took years for the government to fully grant them voting rights. It was done in the ealy 19th centure after much agitation and pressure faced from women. In the beginning their demands were not met, which means that liberalism and democracy did not apply equally to America in this situation. It was unfair to not give women an equal chance to influence the political scenarios of the government. During this era, the United States was undeergoing much change, the industrial revolution and other drastic changes that had casued a change in the life of women, who had started to participate more actively in external and political affairs. They had become more powerful, independent, more educated and learned. They started to work as equals to men, so they considerd themselves as equal members of the society and demanded their rights. Ultimately, they were successful in obtaining them. Works Cited Read More