Notes on Power and Choice Chapters 7 and 8 (January
31st and February 2nd, 2005)
Formal democracy: regular voting practices, fair and
transparent elections, checks and balances for the
implementation of state policies
What is a ‘stable democracy’? One that does not get
effected by regular coup d’etats, regime break-downs,
mono-party leadership, civil wars, etc.
Democracy requires an ‘implicit agreement’ by conflicting
groups to accept responsibility that they may not get all
they want and can sometimes lose out in the making of
policies. Each group, at the end of negotiation process,
must abide with the results and seek further chances to
change them if they remain unhappy. That is why by
definition, democracy is a fragile system; it requires the
cooperation of all. In the face of ethno-religious, classbased or other kinds of conflicts, and also in the presence of
strong militaries who are at times far too eager to take
things over to themselves, democracy as an ideal is
constantly challenged.
That is why, in addition to ‘formal’ democracy, you should
also have a definition pertaining to deliberative and
substantive democracy.
Secondly, the practice of democracy is not the privilege of
the ‘industrialized North’. Indeed, Western countries
themselves suffered from several collapses of democratic
regimes in their recent history.
(Please read the examples on p. 180-181 of your book)
Waves of democratization: the fall of the ‘iron curtain’ in
1989 meant that different alternatives could be entertained
in societies where mono-party rule was dictated since 1945.
Are prosperous countries more likely to be democracies?
What would be the reasons for that?
--welfare state functions better and removes some of the
inequalities or at least makes them border-line bearable
(class wars)
--the sections of the populace who might have challenged
the system might have already migrated, or have been
otherwise integrated into the system (ethno-religious strife)
--the military might have settled its difference or have been
brought under the control of the executive or developed
enough common interests with the executive and thus does
not/cannot consider overthrowing the government (coups)
Do countries that are ‘democracies’ become more
prosperous over time compared to those that are not
democracies? That is a myth, as the comparison between
China and India illustrates. In effect, curtailing labour
rights may be far more beneficial to business investments
than otherwise, and thus democratic practices often go
against the interests of global capital. However, it is safe to
say that it is easier to sustain democratic governance in a
prosperous society where income distribution and public
spending allows for a general sense of welfare.
Are democracy and freedom anonymous? In western
democracies, civil and political rights are often cited as the
cornerstones of democratic politics. However, there is
always the issue of who is capable of enjoying these rights,
and thus an unresolved debate on economic and social
rights.
Also, counter-intuitive examples such as Hong Kong
should be taken into consideration: even though there was
not formal democracy in this former British colony, there
was a widespread exercise of liberal freedoms.
Democracy and liberal freedoms do not always necessarily
imply each other, and, it is possible to institutionalize
freedoms in political regimes which are not necessarily
identified as ‘formal democracies’. Furthermore, it is
sometimes argued that ‘democratisation’ works best when
there is already a well-established background of civil and
political rights. Can you explain the reasons?
Democracy and capitalism: what are the links? Are
freedoms essential for free-market capitalism? The answer
is only some of the freedoms we associate with substantive
democracy are linked with capitalism, whereas other
measures endemic to it are actually against principles of
free-market capitalism—such as social welfare, provision
of public services by the government, etc.—
Autocracy
As a form of governance, it is actually the most common
political system in the world. In other words, countries
governed by democracies are a minority.
Examples of autocratic regimes: The Union of Soviet
Socialist Republics (1917-1991) –please read the sections
in your book on pages 185-186—
Military Government
Group of officers take over the government and govern
under special decrees and based on the premise of
‘extenuating circumstances’. It is a ‘strike at the state’,
shortened as a coup.
One-Party States
These are a special kind of autocracy whereby there is
actually a party and semi-elections and/or rotation of power
within the party itself. Libya, Iraq, Cuba are good
examples, as well as many of the Eastern European states
prior to 1989.
Court Politics
Monarchies, in the form of families or kin-groups, run the
state without mainly very little or no balance of power.
Very little emphasis on the rule of law, and hardly ever any
reliance on meritocracy. Assasinations, exile and murder as
common ways resorted to eliminate competition.
Please read the examples on Peru and Nigeria.