Relationship Between Democracy And Economic Growth

Is democracy excellent for the economic growth? Democracy is a multifaceted concept, a political structure based ahead the right of citizens to take part in political decision making during representation; whereby simply laws essential to continuing democratic procedures are compulsory standard to terming a state democratic.

Democracy and the challenges it is facing has been the main topic in the field of international politics since some Authoritarian regimes have raised again as a great power after a long time of absence. In this essay, we will look at some of the challenges facing the international democracy based on the work of Azar Gat “ The Return Of Authoritarian Great Powers”. The article is presenting the author view on the rise of authoritarian regimes as the main challenge of liberal democracy. The main part of my essay will be an illustration and reflection on a number of arguments that have been brought by the author. Additionally and before concluding my piece I will establish my own argument as a critical response to the article or more specifically to the Economic efficiency argument brought by Azar Gat.

The relationship between capitalism and democracy has been defined by many as fundamental complementary ideologies, and social scientists have discovered an undeniable link between the two structures with some suggesting that “where either capitalism or democracy flourishes, the other must soon follow” (Reich, 2007). Currently, the main form of modern democracy is polyarchal democracy which originated from the Greek word polyarkhe, meaning ‘many rule’. This infers that multiple people within a government system possess political power, making it neither a dictatorship nor a pure democracy ruled by the people. The relationship between these two complementary yet conflicting social structures have led some to believe that there are in fact enemies rather than corresponding entities due to the selfish and competitive nature of capitalism negatively affecting a democracy’s notion of equality.

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.

Some long standing societies have failed to become democratic, even with popular support for such a political system for many different reasons. One, tradition and change is hard. Some states have such a thick religious, cultural, etc. history that they do not know how to incorporate democracy with what their state has, needs and wants. Two, they do not want a democracy. They want to be different and try something new to become better or even equal to the presence that the United States used to play as the main actor of politics worldwide. They see the United States diminishing in ways that it does not wish to, so it does not go with the democracy route. Three, some leaders may find that fear works better than anything else. Isolating people

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

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

The data provided is helpful in determining the nations perception of democracy so that it may help improve and put in place interventions that promote

Democracy is mostly good for small and older communities, where the whole town or community can get together and vote together on decisions that

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.

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

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

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.

In the Acemeglu, Johnson and Robinson article, “Institutions as a Fundamental Cause of Long Term Growth”, the authors emphasize how institutions are the main determinant of economic development because stronger institutions allow for more growth in education, security, and health. To observe whether strong institutions determine economic growth it is important to mention the characteristics of a strong institution that allows for fast growth. Strong institutions are able to enforce property rights, a fair judiciary, efficient bureaucracies, intellectual property rights, corporation government bankruptcy laws, and democracy (e.g. “(Lecture 13)”). Going in depth