In this paper, I first explain Lipset’s arguments pertaining to democratization. Then, I describe and argue in regards to the flaws in certain aspects of Lipset’s argument. Lipset claims that education essentially leads to democracy as it is one of the strongest indicators of it. I argue that this is not always correct because there are countries where people are well-educated but not taxed. This leads to no representation and therefore no democracy. I also show why Lipset’s prediction that many countries (especially in Latin America) would democratize was flawed, and why they did not successfully democratize. Lipset also argues that economic development leads to democracy. However, I argue that this assertion is also flawed. There are simply too many rentier countries that have a vast amount of wealth from oil and minerals and yet they do not democratize. I then explain Ross’s and Anderson’s research and arguments that refute Lipset’s.
Since the dawn of mankind, there has always been a struggle for power, from our primitive ancestors to our present day, supposed, enlightened times. There have been a variety of systems that spawned and died in the political world. It can be assumed that the fruition of democracy emerged after the desire to create a system in which it was equal, sustainable, and transparent and where human rights was recognized. Robert Dahl, a prominent political scientist, had believed creating a democratic society in which he considered was perfect had to have (Dahl, 2000): effective participation, equal voting, enlightened understanding, an open agenda setting and inclusion (p.37-38) . In the present day, there are many countries that consider themselves
In a democratic government also depends on freedom of press and freedom of assembly. Freedom of press is the occurrences that happen every day that are informed or detailed through television, newspaper, internet, magazines or speech without adding or removing any type of information that do not benefit a particular sector. And also is that the people have the right to have their own type of press to express their ideas. Today, freedom of press is a utopia because every country has their own secrets, and covers important information to their citizens. With freedom of press, the countries will have a perfect government not so perfect but the people need to know the truth. The democratic government is a form of government in which the people, either directly or indirectly, take part in governing. “Democracy is the worst form of government except for all those others that have been tried.” This is because there is no system that can perfectly order society. Usually the purpose of democracy is to prevent tyranny (the accumulation of
We know that democracies are common among the economically urbanized countries and rare between the very deprived ones. The reason we scrutinize this pattern is not that democracies are more probable to emerge, as a result, of economic development but that they are to a large extent more possible to survive if they occur to emerge in most urbanized countries. The paths to democracy are diverse. Indeed, they appear to follow no unsurprising pattern. But once democracy is conventional, for whatever reasons, its endurance depends on a few, easily particular, factors.
Democracy: A political system in which citizens enjoy a number of basic civil and political rights, and in which their most important political leaders are elected in free and fair elections and accountable under a rule of law (26). In the studies we have undertaken, comparing and exploring various countries and systems politically, economically, and psychologically throughout the quarter, this outcry of democracy has prevailed as a main theme. Successful countries such as the United States and Great Britain are based upon such democratic ideals. It is no wonder that countries have striven more recently toward this goal of democratization. Both the Russian and Mexican revolutions prove that democracy is an attainable goal in the next
The authors also argue that the greatness of the government driven by democracy is the right to
Democracy came about in a very interesting fashion. It first started out as, a wealthy class of rich males in ancient Greece who had the power to vote and be citizens; while no one else was able to be a citizen and participate in democracy. This notion of democracy slowly evolved out of different revolutions and ideas. We saw great leaps forward in in the evolution of democracy during the US revolution which was exemplified by the cry of: “No taxation without representation.” In the French revolution, in which there has been so much has studied about, is another example of inequality helping democratization. In the modern era, we have seen the Arab spring rise and fall, with some countries making modest reforms and people fighting for as many reforms as they could get; among these, the idea of equality. Pure equality is the striving force that democracy will always try to reach and will never truly achieve.
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
Democracy is a unique type of government, and the purpose of this essay is to illustrate the strengths and weaknesses that a democratic government provides. I will detail that many components of this type of society are both strengths and weakness as each component has beneficial aspects as well as unavoidable pitfalls.
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
Also democracy provides political rights, civil liberties and freedom of press, freedom of association and freedom to oppose to their governments without being afraid of the consequences. Each nation has a unique democratic way of controlling things and under a democratic system people in Latin America could be govern by the government that they choose to and not the military authority or dictatorship. In order to form democracy in Latin American there had to be revolution against authority and the violence that imposed to their citizens. (Isbester K., 2011) O’Donelli defines democracy as ‘patterns, formal and informal and explicit or implicit, that determine the channels of access to principal government positions; the characteristics of the actors who are admitted and excluded ... and the resources and strategies that they are allowed to use for gaining access’
Winston Churchill once remarked that “democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried”. In agreement with his statement, this paper will examine the problems of democratic governments using specific examples, and compare it to the failure of fascist governments in Nazi Germany and Italy and communist governments in the Soviet Union and China.
Churchill’s claim that “democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried” is deliberately provocative and intended to challenge the reader’s simplistic ideal that democracy is without faults. There are an estimated 114 democracies in the world today (Wong, Oct 3rd lecture). A figure that has increased rapidly in the last century not necessarily because democracy is the best form of government, but primarily for reason that in practice, under stable social, economic and political conditions, it has the least limitations in comparison to other forms of government. Be it the transparency of a democratic government or the prevalence of majority rule, all subdivisions of democracy benefit and hinder its
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
As stated before, some people argue that there is a relationship between both indicators, with economic development causing democracy. Based on the data presented here, I would say that that might be true in some countries, but not in the ones that have been addressed here. For example, Russia has a greater GDP per capita than Mexico, but it is considered to be a not free country, while Mexico is a partly free one with a lower GDP per capita. Yes, Russians might have a greater income per capita, but they are not free people. In sum, it can be said that democracy and economic development play huge roles in the development of a country, however these are not the only factors that need to be taken into consideration, and it