The Study Of Democratization Has Been A Key Cornerstone

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.

China and Russia are both countries with strong state traditions who have favored communist systems over the western idea of democracy. But, in the 1990’s, China and Russia began to stray from their communist systems in their own ways. Russia began the shift with rapid political liberalization under Gorbachev followed by the fall of the Soviet Union. China, on the other hand, embarked on a managed transition with step by step introduction of capitalism while the CCP remained the sole political power. China’s transition was hugely successful, experiencing astounding GDP growth and the largest increase in human welfare in history. Russia’s reforms on the other hand was a failure as the soviet lost half its territory and population. Following the fall of the Soviet Union was an economic recession with an increase in crime and death rates. China experienced a huge increase in human welfare while Russia saw a huge downturn. After comparing China’s and Russia’s different path towards modernization, China has seen stronger and stabled growth as opposed to Russia’s shortcomings.

To achieve the prosperity from democracy, for everyone to have an equal say in both political and social ways, there must be a class structure that is equal as well. This is well put in Painter’s novel, “…With most of his fellow citizens, the President believed that the health of the American democracy depended on a fluid class structure, and his own preferred means of discouraging the accumulation of large fortunes was the reduction of protective tariffs. ”(Painter 74). It’s true that when class distribution is uneven democracy starts to erode, because when the rich keep getting richer, they get more powerful and the poor who keep getting poor, lose power and there say in political

The elite theory believes that a small group consisting of powerful people holds the most power, and that this power is independent of a state's democratic elections process. Elite theory argues either that democracy is in all unrealistic, or that democracy is not able to be achieved within capitalism. Within the elite theory not everyone is going to have the power when making decisions only the most powerful group. Overall meaning the elite theory can determine the trajectory of the society, and therefore the conditions which the members of that society must exist and function. When considering who’s interest does the elite theory compromise it would be hard to find an answer considering that all these groups work together to protect each other’s

Democracy has changed throughout the years, both positively and negatively. This assignment will go into depth of democracy, such as, the definitions whether they are simple or complex. The history would then be explained as to how democracy has affected the UK from the start of democracy to 1969 showing some improvements that dramatically changed the way the country works and how it affects citizens. In addition, the political environment would be introduced in more depth showing how the political ideologies affect businesses, again either positively and negatively. (More will be added once completed the rest of the assignment)

Democracy has become the most widespread political form of government during the past decade, after the fall of all its alternatives. During the second part of the 20th century, the 3 main enemies of democracy, namely communism, fascism and Nazism, lost most of their power and influence. However, democracy is still only to be found in less than half of this world's countries. China with a fifth of the total population "had never experienced a democratic government" and Russia still doesn't have a well established democracy. By adopting a democratic perspective, 3 types of governments emerge, non-democratic, new democracies, and old democracies, and all have a different challenge to overcome: either to become democratic, to "consolidate"

Does people with criminal records should have the right to vote? My answer is NO. However, with the development of industrial society and modern technology, the continuous improvement of the degree of rationalization, democratization becomes a non-stop inverse trend. In developed countries democratization process, they always emerge situation repeatedly, along with the democratization of instability and recession. How to achieve democratization, and how to grasp the path of democratization, have became an unavoidable problem. Take a look at the process of democratization of the United States, we found that the democratization of experience that can help our political development. The most important aspect of democratization that electoral rights of citizens, the paper intends to investigate American citizens the right to vote of the development process. Evolution of American citizens the right to vote, can be divided into three stages: the strict restrictions on colonial suffrage, universal suffrage established in the 19th century period, extension of the suffrage of the 20th century.

The article “After Communism: Travails of Democratization” gives brief examples of what happened after the rapid collapse of the communist system. The first stage, roughly 1989-1995, was around the time the Soviet party-state was removed. Soon, everyone was transitioning good to the change, but Russia. Russia was having problems with political and economic change. The reasons why these things happened were very strange for Russia.

Equally important, the Atlantic Revolutions sparked the development of different political institutions. Initially, most revolutions began with the desire for further democracy. But, in some individual societies, this political idea transformed into different systems. After the French Revolution demonstrated the impact of human action, communism began to rise. To illustrate, communism in Russia was inspired by Karl Marx and surfaced with the pursuit of economic and political equality. Socialism stems from democracy because both political parties benefit the general public. However, socialism and communism are like extreme forms of democracy as they are established for the people; democracy is built by the people. In another case, communism also emerged in China. Chairman Mao Zedong’s rule resulted in extractive political and economic institutions. Because of this, China was still able to grow. This “authoritarian growth” can be described as a “bird in a cage”: “China’s economy was the bird; the party’s control, the cage, had to be enlarged to make the bird healthier and more dynamic, but it could not be unlocked or removed, lest the bird fly away” (Acemoglu, Daron, and James A. Robinson, 438). By this, the cage is able to expand but the bird is still limited from achieving true freedom. These political changes fostered equality

After many countries in Latin America received their independence, limited change of conditions occurred and the elite maintained control in the new republics. The basis for economic inequality remained the same and the patterns persisted. In the early 19th century, the majority of countries had developed republican democracies yet the upper class still had the power to act in their own interests. A direct bearing established the extent of the elite’s ability to influence the formation of government policies. Landowners opposed any institutional change that could transfer power

Income inequality is a phenomenon that is undeniably real in our current world, and more specifically, the present United States. Canon describes how the gap between the elite and the poor has been consistently growing for many years and continues to widen (189). Whether the differences between the top and the bottom are a threat to current society is another story. Does income inequality undermine a democracy? Ray Williams argues that societies are strongest when they have a higher rate of equality while George Will challenges that inequality is the very basis of what make democratic processes. A. Barton Hinkle takes a Libertarian approach to the idea that inequality is threatening to democracy and how it can be fixed. Some threats that each article addressed were economic impacts, civility, and fairness. Overall, there is a definite need to evaluate whether the United States democracy is being threatened due to the continuous rise of the elites and the fall of the working class.

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

The government in the United States supposedly revolves around American ideals such as equality and diversity; however, this is simply not the case as perpetuated by class inequalities. The meaning of democracy has been skewed in the United States to represent something entirely different than it did in 1776. Today, American democracy behaves more like an aristocracy, where the upper class exercises power within the government and state, influencing discourse and therefore the laws and resources in our country, which are purportedly “for the people”. Democracy is presumed to provide everyone with equal political power, but the government in today’s America, although seemingly following this ideal model, does not. Instead, the elite upper class has a monopoly over the political influence and are the sole benefactors from public policies due to their influence over the policy making process. The upper class has an overall benefit from class inequality, as it greatly impacts American ‘democracy’ through the significant power gained through money and status, leadership roles that impact government, and the influence in the policymaking process that creates upper class advantages.

In the "Social Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy", the author Barrington Moore Jr. discusses or presents how the upper class and peasants were represented in different in the processes like democracy, fascism, and communism. In the book, Barrington separates the book into 2 parts. Part I focuses on the process to achieving democracy and capitalism in the cases of England, France and the United States of America. Part II of the book focuses on communism, fascism, and an Asian form of democracy for the countries of China, Japan, and India respectively. While there is a lot of material to discuss, reading about the evolutions of these country 's political systems was interesting to read and makes you think about how far we have come not

This research paper uncovers the study of modernization and how it correlates to political development towards democracy. First, it examines the development and origins of the modernization theory that encompass a number of explanations that connect economic, social and cultural changes with shifts in political systems. Modernization puts forth the idea that economic development will lead to cultural and social changes that transform the political behavior of a country’s citizens that can ultimately lead to democratic governments. Subsequently, the paper moves to the empirical evidence supporting the modernization theory and critiquing the theory’s broader applicability. Some critics would suggest that certain types of economic development could actually destabilize society, rather than progressing the cultural and social components that provide the starting point for democratic societies. Meanwhile, others have advocated that wealth does not explain the emergence of democracy, and that the likelihood that a country remains democratic is higher in richer countries. Finally, it will look into future avenues in research on the correlation between political development and modernization.