Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Democracy in developing countries
Democracy in developing countries
Importance of political culture
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Democracy in developing countries
It is important when comparing and contrasting countries to look at the varying factors that make each unique and why each function the way they do. We need this to understand development, possible economic opportunity and get a better understanding of other countries. In this paper specifically we look at Westernization. So why is it that democracy has a positive impact in certain countries, yet has disastrous affects in others? Democracy proves a positive practice in a society that already demonstrates a basis that consists of an already inherited democratic culture. Depending on whether the idea of democracy is maintained or can even be attempted in the first place also depends on a countries stage of development. I, along with many others believe that the more developed a country, the easier democratic rule can be achieved and vice versa. I explore areas such as civic/political culture, economic development, values, cultures and beliefs.
As indicated previously, the developmental stage of a country is a large determining factor as to whether or not democracy can truly survive in the country. A developed country that is able to practice democracy must have a strong fundamental basis, strong support, participation, minimum apathy and above all must maintain the trust of the citizens it holds in order to remain in close ties with the people they represent. On the topic of trust, a fair and democratic government must avoid corruption at all cost. It is its sovereignty that a democratic union holds on dearly to so that it is recognized and followed. The modern day developed countries that swear by the democratic system have displayed, in moments, cooperation with people allowing them to gain a knowledge of what is going on beh...
... middle of paper ...
... culture. Democracy is allowed to survive and flourish because of special traits that the Western World has attained like high economic development and a high level of education allowing citizens to make good, informed and civilized decisions. Depending on whether the idea of democracy is maintained or can even be attempted in the first place also depends on a countries stage of development. Democracy will be destructive to a society if they are not capable of sustaining an educated, fair a free state. This is why it has been so destructive to select African countries and Latin American countries. The idea of Westernization is something that cannot be universally applied simply because not all countries are the same. This has been identified throughout this paper. This fallacy is one that surely needs to be put to rest if genuine global development is to take place.
Between the Authoritarian government and the American democracy, there are many differences. Some are small, but you can definitely see the big differences. Most are between how the government acts to certain situations and how they treat the people of their country.
In contemporary times, the rise of capitalism as a dominant economic trend and its ravenous demand to accumulate sources from new markets, has led to the idea of merging political and economic power into one, which is democratic capitalism or otherwise illustrated as “a system where markets allocate income according to efficiency while governments redistribute income according to political demand."(Iversen, 2006). The advancements mentioned earlier, have given ground for questions concerning the possible compatibility of the political ideology which is democracy and the economic ideology capitalism and how would they affect one another. This mergence could be examined in recent times, whereas in the past around the start of the nineteenth century it was considered as inappropriate and unlikely to happen. This paper aims to demonstrate to what degree are democracy and capitalism compatible, by examining the various areas of conflict of the two ideologies, how has capitalism affected the democratic system in the United States and does actually global capitalism have an impact on the developing countries democracies.
In order to understand how these influences or principles have spread, it must also be figured out how these principles developed. Again here, it must be asserted that the historical context is of vital importance because it reveals the manner in which some actions that took place at particular points in time had formed consensus notions. It is these notions that were carried through and developed into what have become western democratic principles. These had evidently developed with the passage of time due to the occurrences that took place on the American continent; the types of people that landed there were responsible for the influences they had in the formulation of law. Though other western countries experienced similar transition America is one country that must be particularly mentioned (Kagan et al, 2000).
Analysing The West: Unique, Not Universal. Throughout history, Western civilization has been an emerging force behind change in foreign societies. This is the concept that is discussed in the article, the West Unique, Not Universal, written by Samuel Huntington. The author makes a very clear thesis statement and uses a variety of evidence to support it. This article has a very convincing point.
Firstly, K. Isbester mentions that democracy has a different meaning for everyone, as some can define democracy as a good aspect for development, on the contrary other believe that it is nothing more than voting after several years. Although, Latin America see democratic g...
In his article, Democracy as a Universal Value, Amartya Sen asserts that democracy is a universal value. In order to develop his argument Sen needs to state his definition of democracy and define what he means by universal value. In the course of Sen's argument he gives his view of the relationship between democracy and the economy. He then defends his view of democracy as a universal value against a main argument that deals with cultural differences between regions.
In comparing the average citizen in a democratic nation, say the United States, to that of a non-democratic nation, for instance Egypt, it will be found that the citizen in the democratic nation is generally better off – free of persecution, free from fear of the authorities, and free to express his opinions on governmental matters. And while national conflicts occur everywhere, incidents like violent revolts have shown to be more prevalent in nations where citizens are not allowed to choose who governs them. It is slightly paradoxical that democracy, so inherently flawed in theory, can lead to such successful outcomes in practice. The question, then, becomes: “If democracy has so many weaknesses, why does it work?”
Creating a democracy is no easy task. It requires a lot of internal and external factors that could either make or break a successful transition from a non-democratic regime to a democratic one. This essay explains the three major threats to democratic consolidation (international relations, elite commitment, and the role of the military) that countries undergoing transitions from a non-democratic regime to a democratic one might face. This essay will also explain on the argument on why international relations is considered the greatest threat to democratic consolidation.
Democracy is “...the word that resonates in people’s minds and springs from their lips as they struggle for freedom and a better way of life...” (Schmitter and Karl, 1991:75). However, the word democracy has many different means depending on the country and context it is used in. “Every country has is own culture and comes by its political system through its own history” (Greenberg, 2007:101, cited in Li, 2008:4). Li, (2008) states that because of China’s political structure the usual road to democracy may be difficult for it to achieve. The western idea ...
...e power with which powerful states can rule the weak preserving their status as a regional and global hegemony. Finally, it is incorporated the democratic system. Although debatable for some people, democracy serves to spread the altruistic and moralistic rhetoric of a free and peaceful world. Additionally, Western states do not hesitate about the rice of new powerful nations or the threats of the mass destruction weapons, they are constantly monitoring their menaces and evaluating what is the most accurate strategy to maintain at least the status quo in this respect. The Western states need the realist approach in order to be well prepared to cope with any threat. In a final conclusion, all of these reasons have been assimilated by Western states in order to restructure a strategic doctrines with the purposes of counteract any possible threat before they emerge.
Throughout history different types of instrumental regimes have been in tact so civilizations remained structured and cohesive. As humanity advanced, governments obligingly followed. Although there have been hiccups from the ancient times to modern day, one type of government, democracy, has proven to be the most effective and adaptive. As quoted by Winston Churchill, democracy is the best form of government that has existed. This is true because the heart of democracy is reliant, dependent, and thrives on the populaces desires; which gives them the ability for maintaining the right to choose, over time it adjusts and fixes itself to engulf the prominent troubling issues, and people have the right of electing the person they deem appropriate and can denounce them once they no longer appease them. In this paper, the benefits of democracy are outlined, compared to autocratic communism, and finally the flaws of democracy are illustrated.
The question of whether democracy is bad for foreign policy or not is actually a tricky one. Even though one might argue that democracy is not all good for foreign policy, I will argue that it’s indeed good even though there are some leaders that takes advantage of it to cover up their own failures. The United states foreign policy incorporate democracy as well as the esteem of the rights of people. Democracy actually encourages a stable and secure global realm whereby countries can promote their national interest and of all others. Democratic states are more likely to promote peace and at the same time discourage aggression.
There have been enormous efforts to spread democracy as a political system throughout the world by the developed democratic countries and the international development organizations including the World Bank. By the late 1990s the United States alone spent over a half billion dollars to promote democratic expansion throughout the world (Diamond, 2003). These were done considering that the democratic system leads towards development. As a result in the late 20th century we saw a huge political transformation towards democracy. During the last few decades a huge number of countries adopted democracy as their political system. However, it retain a big question how far democracy is successful in bringing development of a country? At this stage, some people also criticizes the effort of democratization arguing that it is done without considering the context of a country, sometimes democracy is not ideal for all countries and it is an effort to extinct diversity of political system. In studying the literature regarding the debate, we found a paradoxical relationship between democracy and development. Some argue that democracy has failed to ensure expected outcomes in terms of development. While others confronted that democracy has a considerable impact on development. Another group of people argue that form of political system actually does not have any impact on development process. On the verge of these debates, some development institutions and academics throw light on why democracy is not working properly, and what measure should be taken to make it more successful in bringing effective development of developing countries. Consequently, this writing is an effort of revisiting the different views about impact of democra...
The foundation of the modern political system was laid in the times when the world was strangled in slavery. In those moments, enlightened minds in Greek came up with the new system that was there to remain for the next thousands of years. This system, now known as democracy, is a form of government in which supreme power is vested to the people themselves. People have the right to elect their leaders directly or indirectly through a scheme of representation usually involving periodically held free elections. A new democratic government is usually established after every 4-5 years, and it is trusted with the responsibility to cater to the needs of all the people irrespective of the fact that they voted for them or not. Although the minorities may not be very pleased with the idea of democracy, however, a democratic government is certainly the best because it establishes social equality among people, reduces the conflicts in the state to a minimum, gives the chance to vote repeatedly, and creates patriotism.
Since the late twentieth century, the world has experienced a vast transformation with regards to world economies, culture, and politics. The great advancements in technology and communication since the late twentieth century has served a catalysts for what is known today as globalization. The ambition to develop a single global economy along with a universal culture are the promises of globalization. Perhaps the clearest evidence that demonstrates globalization is a reality is the fact that at this point in time very diverse cultures form around the world closer to each other than ever before. That being said, when it comes to the spreading of democracy and human rights, having world cultures closer to each other can prove to be beneficial