Democracy Hinders Growth And Its Effect On Economic Development

Those who are in power are not accountable to constituencies and public policy does not derive from social consent. Within sociology and political science, particularly within comparative politics, authoritarianism has been understood as a modern type of political regime. Therefore, the concept focuses on the way of accessing, exercising, and organizing power, on the nature of the belief system, and the role of citizens in the political

Since people at the top of society only care about their own personal gain, they do not worry about improving the economy as a whole. As previously mentioned, economic growth often makes the transition to democracy much easier.

In his argument on the universal value of democracy Amartya Sen discusses the relationship between democracy and economic development. He notes that it is often claimed that nondemocratic systems are better at bringing about economic development than democratic ones. Sen disagrees with this claim. He asserts that this hypothesis is based on "very selective and limited information" (3). He admits that it is true that some disciplinarian states, like South Korea, Singapore, and postreform China, have had faster rates of economic growth than many less authoritarian ones, like India, Jamaica, and Costa Rica (3). However, he points out that this very selective evidence cannot be used to establish the general hypothesis that nondemocratic systems are better at bringing about economic development (3). "There is no convincing evidence that authoritarian governance and the suppression of political and civil rights are

Smith writes that “wherever there is great property, there is great inequality,” and this inequality, though ultimately necessary to advance beyond the “universal poverty” of primitive hunting societies, creates a potential for violence (766; 768). The poor outnumber the wealthy stock-owners and landlords, and so are “both driven by want, and prompted by envy” to invade their possessions (766). To preserve their property, these groups establish civil governments, for it is “only under the shelter of the civil magistrate that the owner of that valuable property … can sleep a single night in security” (767). This form of government “supposes a certain subordination” on the basis of personal qualifications, age, fortune, and birth; of these, however, “the authority of fortune … is much greater than that, either of age, or of personal qualities,” and superiority of birth is merely the reflection of “an ancient superiority of fortune” (767-9). Effectively, “civil government … is in reality instituted for the defense of the rich against the poor” (771). Civil government is created as a result of inequality of wealth, with its purpose as the security of wealth. Though accumulation of wealth does not automatically confer political power, political power is established for the original purpose of securing the interest of every stock-owner and landlord. As this type of civil

Does Modernization lead to Democracy or does it not? My hypothesis for this research question is that modernization does not lead to democracy even as I explore the different kinds of literature written on this subject. As part of my research design I have decided to use a single case study as a comparative method. This is because case studies offer a detailed explanation of the topic of discussion transforming “journalism into political science” (Hague & Harrop, 2013: 361). I have decided to look at Singapore to provide a well-rounded description which will therefore show how it operates in the context of modernization and democracy. One of the primary authors who decided to study the relationship between economic development and democracy was Seymour Martin Lipset in both this books titled Political Man and The Social Requisites of Democracy. (Heo & Tan, 2001) Since his literature came out more and more social scientists began to expand or critique on the words of Lipset in carrying out their own research. It is clear to see that discourses around economic progress and democracy are still debated to this day. Arguments around whether or not democracy should come first then development follows are also being discussed in other areas. However there is a general consensus across the board of most authors that the two are closely related. Many argue that they go hand in hand; it is not wise to have one without the other. In helping to answer my research question the work of

When that fails, people take to the streets. This was what happened in East Germany and in many Latin American countries. Machado et al. discuss these Latin American, and the conclude that it was the institutional quality within the political structure determines individual choices to affect political decisions They found that the more a government lacks performance in their fulfillment roles as a government, leads to a higher incentive for citizens and groups to try to influence the governing process through

The Importance of External Influences in Building a Democracy In Democracy in the Third World, Robert Pinkney analyzed circumstances that have been important in the past for building a democracy for current democratic regimes. Pinkney studies seven comparatives and their theories for the cause and effect of democracy and identifies their pros and cons. The most important of these conditions stands in the external influences and foreign participation in building the state as a democracy of a non-democratic country.

institutions, growth, development, political power, rents, conflict, property rights, efficiency, distributions JEL classification:D7, H 1, 010,040

The study of how both economic and cultural factors influence differences in the quality of democracy across the globe is extremely important; insight into this specific political outcome will allow governments to analyse and promote potential democratic movement and policy as accurately as possible. In this essay I will use the most similar systems de-sign (MSS) to explore three case studies using statistical analysis of data with two de-pendent variables, in attempt to conclude the extent to which economic modernisation theory and cultural modernisation theory can explain variations in the quality of democra-cy in my chosen countries. I have chosen to study Algeria, Libya, and Tunisia due to their compatibility with the MMS design, given their variation in levels of democracy by Polity IV rating, yet their similarities regarding their strong Arab influence, geographical proximity, colonial history, religious and ethnic homogeneity, and their strong ties both historically and economically with Europe (Contreras, 2007, pp. 109-110). All three countries form part of the Maghreb region of northwest Africa which has historically experienced an enormously diverse flow of people across its territory, one example of this being its Euro-pean colonisation during the earlier twentieth century. Whilst each successive colonisation has heavily influenced the regions’ terrain and social habits, the Arab influence still domi-nates the region (Griffiths, 2015 p.166). This is easily

Democracy, in essence, is the governance of and by the entirety of the population. In a democracy, the citizens exercise their power directly or through an elected representative. Democracy is ideally a structure of governance that is by and for the people. These definitions represent democracy in its most pure unadulterated sense, true direct democracy (or participatory democracy). James N. Danziger in Understanding the political world expresses that “[…] participatory democracy […] is when all the citizens are active, direct participants in making public policy decisions. Realistically [there is no true form of this political system].” (Chapter 7, Page 170) As inevitably experienced with any political system, some are more equal than others. Though. in contrast to other forms of governance, such as federalism, republics, monarchies, dictatorships, etc., democracy has been proven to be the most efficient. As Winston Churchill famously said, “Democracy is the worst form of government, except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.”

Politics is a big part of being a citizen and staying up to date with politics is important. Those who are uninformed will have a harder time making wise choices that help themselves and those around them. We the People tells us that "To be politically engaged in a meaningful way, citizens require resources, especially political knowledge and information." and that "Democracy functions best when citizens are informed." (Ginsberg, et al., 2016, p.10)

In Why Nations Fail, Daron Acemoglu and James Robinson show that economic development is about more than just economics. Through a wide variety of natural experiments ranging from Latin America, to Sub Saharan Africa, to East Asia, they argue that it is institutions, both political and economic, that differentiate a country’s economic success. Specifically, they separate institutions into inclusive and extractive. Inclusive political institutions engage the entire population, while extractive political institutions are ruled by an elite minority. Similarly, inclusive economic institutions promote property rights and competitive markets, while extractive economic institutions create monopolies and funnel wealth to the elite minority. The novel part of their thesis is the idea in order to have sustainable inclusive economic institutions, a country must first have inclusive political institutions. It is only when a country has inclusive economic and political

Politics and power are significant in all societies, rich or poor. In Prosperity and Violence, the Political Economy of Development, Harvard academic Robert H. Bates gives insight on the relationship between political order and economic growth. By analyzing the revolution of agrarian societies to industrial societies, he argues that as these transitions occur, violence is often used to strengthen the system of production.

Prevalent flaws within most modern democracies are evident in their social and economic systems. One such problem, in a system that advocates freedom to do whatever you please, is the consequential wealth disparity (Wong, Oct. 24 lecture, tutorial). Aristotle once said that, “democracy is the form of government in which… the free are the many and the rich are the few”. This highlights a paradox of democracy in that it attempts to be equal to all, yet often the rich will get richer and the poor will get poorer, and an increasing wealth divide will influence governance. Constant writes (pg. 12), “wealth is a power more readily available at any moment… more

This research question fits into the wider field of political economy. The scholarship available on the broad topic of development and its relationships to democracy is numerous, however the key schools of thought can be grouped into four distinct perspectives. Each perspective understands the relationship between development and democracy differently- especially relating to the role of various actors or institutions, while some find no significant relationship at all. The literature review below will utilize a funnel strategy of first summarizing the major perspectives from the broad topic of development and democracy, then moving on to my narrower focus which is the relationship between development and democracy in developmental states- that is, states that have a unique state-market institutional set up and achieve rapid economic development.