Atlantic Community:Global Must Read Article "The Worldwide Democratization Wave is Waning "

The Worldwide Democratization Wave is Waning

Larry Diamond | Foreign Affairs | April 2008

Since 1974, over 90 countries have adopted a democratic course. Around the turn of the century, 60% of the world's independent states were considered democratic. Yet in Foreign Affairs, Larry Diamond warns us against celebrating the triumph of democracy too soon: in just a few years, the wave of democratization has turned into an authoritarian pull that has precipitated the world into a kind of democratic recession. The most famous examples for this are Nigeria, Russia, Thailand, Venezuela, Bangladesh and the Philippines.

Despite innumerable warnings on behalf of experts regarding the mere illusion of "electoralism," too many western politicians have chosen to turn a blind eye to the fact that no good can come of this superficial form of democracy. They assume that if it calls itself democracy, then it must be democracy. But the fact that "regular" elections are held, a variety of parties are competing, and that there seems to be a constitutional guarantee is not sufficient. Even a powerful opposition is not enough to overcome electoral authoritarianism. Free and fair elections require more: neutral and independent authorities for instance, with effective control abilities, a culture of open debate together with institutionalised consensus mechanisms, and widespread access to mass media. According to these criteria, countries such as Georgia, Mozambique, Senegal or the Philippines can no longer be counted among the world's democracies. A study of the Freedom House recently warned: for the first time since 1994, freedom has considerably regressed for two consecutive years. The "Freedom indicator" which is the number of countries of which results have improved in relation to the number of countries of which results have worsened, has reached its all-time low since the fall of the wall.

Over the next decade, the fate of democracy will not depend on whether it manages to replace the remaining dictatorships or how many of them it overturns. The future of democracy lies in the hands of the countries that qualify today as "threatened democracies." Over fifty countries belong to this category - starting with most Latin American countries, all former Soviet republics (apart from the Baltic States), four of the eight Asian democracies as well as nearly all of Africa. These young democracies must prove that they solve their people's problems and that they can fulfil their citizens' expectations for freedom, justice, a better life, and a fair society. If this fails, people will lose their fragile faith in democracy and turn their back on it. Recent surveys confirm this trend. Only a fifth of the Latin American population still believe they can count on political parties and democracy. In Eastern Europe this figure is lower still.

This summary was prepared by the Atlantic Community editorial team from "The Democratic Rollback" published here in Foreign Affairs.

Larry Diamond is Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University, and founding co-editor of the Journal of Democracy.

Related materials from the Atlantic Community:

I like this Article! What's this?

Comments

Sat, Apr 19th 2008, 13:35

ilyas m mohsin, ppp, Platinum Contributor (250)

I like this comment! What's this?

Larry is right. There appears to be a negative trend in the world which threatens the spread of democracy. While the new democracies are to blame, the policies pursued by powerful democratic countries in the uni-polar world also contribute to the current mess.
Despite Globalisation, trade policies are heavily tilted in favour of the latter. In addition, such countries can undermine the UN etc if their interests are compormised. The current US Administartion takes the cake for living of 'my way or highway.'
With the only superpower, it appears, democracy does not form the first priority. To promote their perceived inerest, usually short-term, they sacrifce democracy as an adjunct. This is writ large in the Middle east, South/ Latin America, Soth/ South East Asia. Even the aid is manipulated to support friendly dictators. So the status quo is the outcome of the 'to be or not to be' approach', generally, of the known-powerful democracies.

Mon, Apr 21st 2008, 08:32

amarjyoti acharya

I like this comment! What's this?

Is democracy on the wane? Larry says yes. Perhaps one may need to look at larger issues at hand and get a fairer picture. There were talks of democratization wave. What did one mean by it? The change in the pronouncements of those who occupied the decision-making processes in avrious different states? Or did one mean the initiation of democracy as a set of values and practices that is institutionalized in different states and societies. The question then comes is : how many states and societies that gave rise to the term 'democratization wave' actually have measured up to the structural as well as 'cultural' - if you forgive that term - demands that democracy puts in as its condition? The moment one looks at things from that perspective - then it becomes less the issue of the democratization wave and more of the 'cultural' theories at play here.

This, of course, is by no stretch of imagination to equate :

1. Religious Faith or Orientation with having the necessary values (Those that espouse such 'medieval subtexts' often find reversals elsewhere and betray their ignorance about and behind Europe's period of Enlightenment that was a hard-fought battle and a hard-won battle for the right of the individual - against religious tyranny).
2. Regional or lingusitic markers for such values.
3. Cultural differences as the excuse behind the lack or propensity for states or societies to exhibit their democracy-friendly nature or anti-democracy tendencies.

It is not that democracies are at wane, but rather the curious reality of many states being barely a state - where it fulfills the basic conditions that enjoins the very notion of a state. Whether one likes it or not - state (as a term and as a reality) is an outflow from Europe's Enlightenment period that is said to have seriously began its existence after the WestPhalian Treaty.

The rush by many states to 'make hay while the sun shines' in the international community - foreign policies; flying with the external trappings - a flag at the UN being the most desired commodity at display even if its being a signatory to the various instruments of the UN get flayed in its face when faced with any closer honest scrutiny; the vain-glory of its elites ruthless in their manipulation within and in the world fora, etc. go a long way to ensure not merely the contending forces of order - religion is one such force - to attempt a comeback or over-throw, but also destabilise the other states within its 'sphere of influence'.

It is not that democracy is on the wane. It is more true to acknowledge the reality of the various cognitive worlds co-existing and colliding - and unfortunately, that do inhabit different temporal zones in the human social history. This is more the result of misperception by the global elites and mis-reportage by the local elites on their 'making hay' exercises that lend to and encourage the continued existence of such temporal lag. The issue of identity and culture are merely the diffident and stubborn refusals by such 'elites' of states that barely are so - one calls them failed states - to acknowledge that democracy and secularization and the right of the individual go together and are values that call for intelligence instead of empty rhetorics; of empathy instead of patronization; the basic respect for law - in its letter and spirit and the creation of social conditions that encourage individual growth and harmony - the function of laws that flows from a state.

In more concrete terms, one again goes back to the various distinctions that exist behind the Post-Industrial Society, the industrial Society, the Industrializing society, and the Pre-industrial Society. It is more the reality of the various cognitive worlds existing in the various temporal zones - a reality that always has been there, rather than democracy being on the wane.

Of course, post-industrial societies and their discussions - when they form the substance for 'abuse' for the elites of pre-industrial or industrializing societies - confusions are bound to arise in terms of piracy - of both democracy and its values. Piracy - as we all know harms the corporation, which in this context are the industrial and post-industrial societies - and one needs to mention - bereft of the religious sub-texts that many would desire to espouse. It may help more to look at the various states and their health as states.

Mon, May 5th 2008, 15:41

Wim Roffel

I like this comment! What's this?

Democracy doesn't come alone. Larry mentions free debate and a free press as something wiithout which democracy cannot exist. I agree, but I think that that is only part of the story. Democracy requires also the rule of law. When voters have to choose between two currupt elites this isn't real democracy.