Assignment
Political Processes and Institutions in Comparative Politics
Submitted by- Mahi Panchal, 2018\112.
Question- Given the complexities in the process of democratic transition and consolidation,
do you agree that economic prosperity is a necessary condition for the growth of democracy
in any society? Comment.
Introduction:
Democratic states appears in many different forms and sages of development. Some political
scientists argue strongly for a clear line of demarcation between democracies and
undemocratic states. This distinction, is very important to like at the rapid growth of
democratic state. This growth is often called ‘Democratisation’ (the continual process of
transformation a political system towards more democratic arrangement) and is usually
divided into waves. The first wave, form the mid-19th cent to 1920, coincide with the rise of
the nation state. The second wave, from after the second world war to early 1960’s, was
mainly the result of decolonization. The third wave, from about 1975 to the end of 20th
century, followed the spread of democracy in Latin America and Asian and the decentration
of USSR. The terms failed democracy, partial democracy and illiberal democracy have been
introduced to deal with the fact that democratisation can be reversed and that some states
have not become fully democratic.
There is much debate about the meaning and definition of democracy and its most important
characteristics. Few characters can be termed under the category of- Embedded, Partial and
Defective democracies
The democratic transformation and consolidation are complex processes that are not easily
explained. There are thus various theories that explains the process. In our essay we will be
focusing on the theory of ‘Modernisation’ and ‘Dependency Theory’
Modernization Theory-
Martin Lipset emphasised on the importance of economic development as a necessary
precondition for democracy. The theory itself gives away the dual process of technological
and economic development along with social response for this change. Usually the rise of
middle class is seen crucial for democracy and a larger and strong middleclass is the result of
the manifold processes called ‘modernization’ itself.
The explanation is criticised on the basis of being Eurocentric and being too broad and
general to provide us with exact explanation for democratization.
Dependency Theory-
The second intellectual tradition instated that the 3rd world countries were poor because the
west had trapped them in a structural condition of economic dependency. To break out,
argued theorists such as ‘Andre Gunder’ and ‘Immanuel Wallestrine’, emphasised that such
countries needs to assert control over their resources, trade and side line domestic business
class that bid foreign trading. Thus, economic affluence and related social changes are needed
to improve the chances of democratic consolidation as stated by (Lipset, 1959). He
interpreted that correlations was in terms of affluence reducing lower class discontent.
Levels of industrialisation ,urbanisation and education were also found to be higher ,the more
democratic country .Lipset argued that economic development led to greater economic
security and better education ,both of which allow longer time perspective and more complex
and gradualist views of politics increased wealth and education also contribute to pluralism
by increasing the extend to which the lower strata are exposed to cross pressures which will
reduce the intensity of their commitment to give ideologies and make them less receptive to
supporting extremist ones
Economic development also enlarges the middle class, whose interest is in moderating
conflicts which it is able do by rewarding moderate political parties and penalizing extremist
ones. Economic development affects other classes to. the greater the wealth of the lower class
the opportunity there is for the upper classes to deny them their political rights. The wealthier
the country, the less important it becomes less significant and they are, non -democratic
means of holding on to power become redundant, as does nepotism
Lipset, also argues that wealth proliferated counter vailing sources of power and
opportunities for political participation, communication and recruitment, all of which are
supportive of democracy
However, Europe ‘s unstable democracies and authoritarian regimes were shown to have had
higher levels of development than Lipset’s group of Latin American democracies. The
problem with Lipset’s analysis was that it revealed correlation without accurately without
indicating the direction of causality
The egalitarian aspect of Lipset’s theory has also been supported by subsequent investigation.
Prezewoski found that the relationship between inequality of income ad the level democracy
at a given point in time showed no casual effect. but when measure of democratic stability
were done less develop countries with democratic regimes and relatively low income
inequality were found to experience regime stability
As democracy is require certain political institutions, it is quite interesting that they do not
have a higher impact on economic. Growth what matters for economic development is infect
political stability rather than political institution
Political mediation in Economic consolidation;
Despite the evidence suggesting, democracy will only be sustained when the economic
conditions and their associated structural changes in society are right , it would be wrong to
think that socio-economic structure are all that individually matter. The autonomy of political
factors has to be recognised too. Is possible for a state poor and free , example – Benin and
Bolivia and Prospers and repressive like Labia and Burnie .
Larry D, suggests that while it remains true that democracy is more sustainable at hogher
levels of development, an unprecedented number of poor countries adopted democratic form
of government during 1980s and 90s and many of them have sustained democracy for well
over a decade . these include African countries such as Gahanna ,Benin and Senegal an done
of the poorest Asian countries like Bangladesh, are now using the political institutions of
democracy as the rebuild their economies and states after civil war .
Conclusion
The significance of economic development , thus shoes how important it is to recognise that
political reforms sensibly be perused in isolation from measures designed to strengthen the
performance of 3rd world countries’ economies it is right to assert that the importance of
political prerequisites of democracy and the status of economic factors as necessary but not
sufficient conditions for consolidations.
