10. Consolidation of power in hands of majority
Characterized by:
Exclusiveness
Competititveness
Adversarial Nature
What are the model’s traditional features?
11.
12. Sharing of power for broader participation
and agreement in govt.
Characterized by:
Inclusiveness
Bargaining
Compromise
What are the model’s traditional features?
16. Control of Military & Police by Elected Officials
Impact on Internal Sovereignty
Many governments in this region
gained power by military coups
and other non-democratic means.
Costa Rica = Democracy
17. Control of Military & Police by ElectedOfficials
Democratic Beliefs and Political Culture
Citizen preference of democracy
Occurs through socialization
Reciting the Pledge of Allegiance
in elementary school is an early
form of political socialization.
18. Control of Military and Police by ElectedOfficials
Democratic Beliefs and Political Culture
No Foreign Control Hostile to Democracy
Country cannot be influenced by non-democratic or
authoritarian entity
19. Limited or No Cultural Conflict
“Us” vs. “Them”
Democratic Institutions amid Cultural Diversity?
▪ Assimilation
▪ Decision by Consensus
▪ Electoral Systems
▪ Separation
Modern Market Economy and Society
20. Limited or No Cultural Conflict
“Us” vs. “Them”
Democratic Institutions amid Cultural Diversity?
▪ Assimilation
▪ Decision by Consensus
▪ Electoral Systems
▪ Separation
Modern Market Economy and Society
21. Limited or No Cultural Conflict
“Us” vs. “Them”
Democratic Institutions amid Cultural Diversity?
▪ Assimilation
▪ Decision by Consensus
▪ Electoral Systems
▪ Separation
Modern Market Economy and Society
24. Democracy-Dictatorship Measure
Governmental Offices
▪ Chief Executive and Legislature are ELECTED
Contestation
▪ Uncertainty – Outcome NOT known beforehand
▪ Irreversibility –Winner of election actually takes office
▪ Repeatability – Elections occur at regular intervals
25.
26.
27. Democracy-Dictatorship Measure
POLITY Measure
Competitiveness and Openness of Executive
Recruitment
▪ Can anyone run for president? (Restrictions in U.S.)
Regulation and Competitiveness of Political
Participation
▪ How many political parties exist?
28. Democracy-Dictatorship Measure
POLITY Measure
Freedom House Measure
Political Rights
▪ Electoral Process, Participation, Functioning of Govt.
Civil Rights
▪ Freedom of Expression, Rule of Law, Personal Autonomy
29.
30. We can argue that the U.S. became a democracy at different historical points.
Our final topic for the first section of the course concerns the interrelated ideas of democracy and democratization.
These are seemingly simple concepts in theory but, if considered correctly, can become complicated in practice.
We first need to property define democracy.
Democracy is a form of government where all citizens have an equal say in the decisions affecting their lives.
“Democracy” is from the Greek work demokratia (“rule of the people.”)
It derives from two Greek roots:
1) “Demos” (“people”)
2) “Kratos” (“power”)
Characterizing democracy is a much harder endeavor.
This section introduces the work of Robert Dahl and Arend Lijphart, two influential scholars who have provided great insights into this area of comparative politics.
Dahl provides a normative or idea treatment of this topic in his book, On Democracy.
He argues that democracy provides opportunities for:
1) Effective Participation
All members of a given society must have equal and effective opportunities
for making their views known to other members as to what policy should be
2) Voting Equality
Every member of a society must have equal opportunity to vote for or
against the final policy proposal. Each person’s vote must count equally
3) Enlightened Understanding
Within a reasonable time frame, each member must have equal and effective
opportunities for learning about the relevant alternative policies and their
likely consequences
4) Control of the Agenda
Members must have exclusive opportunity to decide how, and if they choose,
what matters to place on the agenda.
5) Inclusion of Adults
All (or at least) most adult permanent residents should have full citizenship
rights inferred by the first four criteria
Arend Lijphart’s Patterns of Democracy conceptualizes democracy in two models.
I have placed a handout on Canvas which provides detailed information about these models. You will want to take time and review it.
He argues that if democracy can be defined as “government by and for the people,” then certain questions naturally arise:
Who will do the governing?
Whose interests should government respond when disagreement happens?
The majoritarian model consolidates power in hands of a bare majority.
This model is characterized by exclusiveness, competitiveness, and an adversarial nature.
The model’s traditional features are as follows:
1) A centralized government is present and powerful in the political system.
2) The executive branch plays an influential role in the system.
3) Legislative power exists in a unicameral (one house) body.
4) Legislatures have the final say on the constitionality of new legislation.
5) Existence of two political parties.
6) Pluralist interest groups with “free-for-all” mentality.
7) Have flexible constitutions that are easily amended by a simple majority.
Example: Great Britain is a classic example of a majoritarian system
The consensus model shares power for broad participation and agreement in government.
This model is characterized by inclusiveness, bargaining, and compromise.
The model’s traditional features are as follows:
1) The government and political system is generally decentralized.
2) Existence of an balance of powers between the executive and legislative branches of government.
3) Legislative power is divided in bicameral (two house) legislature.
4) Legislatures subject to judicial review of legislation.
5) Existence of multiple political parties.
6) Interest groups’ goals are compromise and coordination.
7) Rigid constitutions changed by extraordinary majorities
Example: The United States typifies the consensus model
How do we know if a country is democratic or not?
We can measure the extent of democracy in qualitative and quantitative terms.
Robert Dahl’s On Democracy argues that the presence of two types of conditions favor democratic institutions.
The next slides discuss (1) essential and (2) favorable conditions in more detail.
The first essential condition for democracy is the control of military and police by elected officials.
Leaders who have access to means of physical punishment (e.g. military and police) have a large say over a country’s degree of internal sovereignty
Review the term “internal sovereignty’ from my lecture on the State.
Example: Central American Nations
Many governments in Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, and Nicaragua gained power by military coups and other non-democratically elected means.
Costa Rica, by contrast, is a democracy.
Dahl’s second essential condition centers on democratic beliefs and the impact of political culture.
Citizens must actually prefer democracy to other options.
This partially occurs through the political socialization process. This is the process of how individuals come to know what they think and believe about politics.
One early influence is children in schools reciting the Pledge of Allegiance, a statement promoting democratic beliefs such as liberty and justice for all.
The final essential condition is the absence of a strong foreign control that would be hostile to democracy.
Democratic countries cannot be influenced by any nondemocratic or authoritarian entity that might impact its internal or external sovereignty.
The following slides present Dahl’s favorable conditions for democracy. While these elements would be preferred in democratic nations, they are not required for a democratic government to flourish.
The first favorable condition is limited or no cultural conflict.
Cultural homogeneity will also lead, Dahl argues, to democratic institutions.
If a country has many cultures, they are much more likely to have differing views on language, religion, race, ethnicity, etc. This forms an “Us” vs. “Them” mentality.
Culture often becomes a way of life for its members, and people view their desires as non-negotiable / without compromise.
We can ask ourselves, “How have democratic institutions been maintained in countries with high levels of cultural diversity, like the United States?”
Here are a few possible answers:
1) Assimilation: This has been the traditional solution in the U.S. The “melting pot” conception of citizenship values cultural homogeneity. The present and future states of assimilation in our country are in question due to partisan divisions regarding illegal immigration, etc.
2) Decision by Consensus: This practice is favored in several European countries such as Switzerland, Belgium, and The Netherlands. This idea features a unanimous nature of decision-making instead of majority rule. How feasible is this idea in country like the United States.
3) Electoral Systems: You can also design electoral systems to change incentives of candidates to appeal to wider population. Democratic elections require support from more than one or dominant societal group.
4) Separation: This might be the answer if all else fails. Different groups can still maintain their identity and achieve culturally-based goals. Think about our fight for Independence from Britain.
The second favorable condition for democracy in a Dahlian sense is the fact that economic enterprises (e.g. small businesses, etc.) are owned privately.
Allows for market-creating, market-stabilizing, and market-legitimating institutions that I have already detailed in discussing political economy.
We can also measure democracy in more quantitative terms.
There are three central methods to empirically measure the presence or absence of democracy. The next slides discuss each in detail.
1) Democracy-Dictatorship Measure
A country is classified as democracy if criteria are met in two areas:
a) Governmental Offices: The Chief Executive and legislators of a given country
are actually elected by the people.
b) Contestation: The opposition has chance of gaining power through elections.
Three points characterize this idea:
1. Uncertainty: The outcome of a given election is unknown before
it actually takes place. In perfect democratic systems, the voting
process is legitimate and free of fraudulent behavior, vote
tampering, etc.
2. Irreversibility: The winner of an election actually takes office
following the conclusion of the vote and certification of the
results. In authoritarian regimes, this is not always the case.
3. Repeatability: Elections occur at regular intervals. In the U.S.,
we have scheduled midterm congressional elections in the
middle (2 years) of a presidential term (4 years). We know when
these elections are going to happen. In other nations, elections
can be “delayed” by those in power to maintain authority.
Barack Obama’s 2008 and 2012 elections are good examples of these traits.
Uncertainty: The outcome of each vote was not known with certainty before Election Night.
Irreversibility: Obama was actually formally inaugurated and took office. I have posted a video on Canvas of Obama’s 2012 inauguration.
Repeatability: U.S. elections occur at regular two and four-year intervals.
The POLITY measure is a second way to measure democracy.
A given country’s democracy score” is calculated based on the following:
1) Competitiveness and Openness of Executive Recruitment
Who can actually run for president?
There are restrictions in U.S. including age and citizenship requirements.
2) Regulation and Competitiveness of Political Participation
How many political parties are there in the country?
How can citizens express themselves? (e.g. protests, etc.)
The final quantitative measure is Freedom House.
A country’s freedom score is based on a 1-7 measure on the following:
1) Political Rights, which include:
- The country’s electoral process
- The country’s level of political participation
- The country’s overall functioning of government
Is the government open and accessible between elections?
Do people have right to organize?
Is there a competitive opposition to challenge those in power?
2) Civil Rights, which include;
- Freedoms of Expression and Belief
- Rule of Law
- Personal Autonomy and Individual Rights
Do you have a free and independent media?
Are three free religious organizations?
Is there an independent judiciary?
Are citizens granted equal protection under law?
Our second topic for discussion in this topic is democratization.
This is a key question in this literature that we will consider on the next few slides.
There are two basic terms that we need to know:
1) Bottom-Up Democratic Transition
People rise up to overthrow authoritarian regime in popular revolution.
A popular rising at the grassroots level leads to eventual overthrow of the current authoritarian regime. Over time, democratic reforms are put into place including increasing per capita income and introduction of political rights (e.g. voting).
2) Top-Down Democratic Transition
Ruling elite gradually introduce liberalizing reforms ultimately leading to a democratic transition.
The elite in a given country, perhaps sensing that a popular revolution might be on the horizon, gradually increase reforms to democratize their state.
Samuel Huntington spent his academic life answering research questions related to democratization. We will consider his ideas now.
Samuel Huntington was a faculty member at Harvard and Columbia Universities.
He discusses issue of democratization through three historical periods of “waves” displaying the ebb and flow of democracy occurring throughout modern civilization.
The “first wave” of democratization, according to Huntington, had their roots in American and French Revolutions.
The U.S. and European nations began to expand voting rights to citizens who were historically excluded (e.g. African-Americans, Women). Chief executives in these nations were responsive to elected legislatures.
The wave “receded” in the 1930s, as military coups (Latin America) and fascism (Europe) reversed democratic gains.
The “second wave” of democratization found its origins in World War II. Germany, Austria, and Japan came out of WWII as democracies.
Over time, pro-Democratic rhetoric/ideology gave way to independence movements against European colonialism.
This wave “receded” in the 1960s, as military coups and dictatorships emerged in Latin America, Asia, and Africa. During this period, Cold War politics set in—U.S. supported dictatorship who met minimum anti-Communist standards.
The “third wave” of democratization began in the 1970s and continues today.
Democratic governments replaced military rule in Latin America (Ecuador, Peru, Bolivia, Argentina, Brazil) and Asia (India).
Eastern Europe experienced democracy with fall of Berlin Wall. I have placed a video of Former President Ronald Reagan on Canvas during his famous “Tear Down This Wall” speech in Berlin in the 1980s. Be sure and watch this short clip.
Once-Soviet nations (Lithuania, Belarus, Armenia, Georgia, etc.) declared their independence following USSR collapse.
This picture shows all of the independent states that were once part of the USSR, representing the extent of the “third wave” of democratization.
Michael Bratton and Nicolas van de Walle are a set of important scholars in the democratization literature.
I will explain their contributions as the next portion of this lecture.
In examining Africa, they propose several approaches to studying democratization:
1) Structural vs. Contingent Approach
- Structural: Structures purposefully designed with democratization in mind,
including institutions and periodic elections.
- Contingent: Democratization process is more fluid and subject to peoples’
wishes, political environment, etc. Outcomes (e.g. policy changes may
come from interaction, bargaining, etc.
2) International vs. Domestic Approach
- International: Global system may encourage democratization
- Domestic: People may protest or express desire for democratization
3) Economic vs. Political Approach
- Economic: Come from instability from wealth disparities, etc.
- Political: Outcomes of revolution, etc.
The final component of this lecture focuses on a few other causes of democratization.
We can view democratization in political and economic terms.
Political Causes of Democratization:
1) Political Institutions: People can vote for leaders or run for office, etc. Institutions devise rules and order for a society.
2) Globalization: Participation in the international system is dependent on trade with other nations, etc.
Economic Causes of Democratization:
1) Economic Shocks and Crises: Depression hitting country might cause people to organize to solve food shortages, etc. and eventually want to rise up against repressive government.
2) Composition of Wealth: Democratization might be more likely if per capita income is not equalized amongst societal groups, etc.
3) Inter-Group Inequality: Tied to composition of wealth above. Citizen discontent about their station in life can force the government to make changes.
We can also seek to explain the onset of democratization through society and culture.
Social Causes of Democratization:
The Middle Class: Can be driver for democratization due to greater degree of wealth and education. They can make it more attractive than repression for elites while helping to change policy enough to stave off revolt by poorer classes.
Cultural Causes of Democratization:
Civil Society: Includes friends, civic groups, and associations. Repression by elites becomes harder when citizens organized and sharing ideas.
