Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Democracy and authoritarianism - Coggle Diagram
Democracy and authoritarianism
Definition:
Fluid definition
Although
autocracy
and
democracy
are seen as binaries
Eroded democracy
Illiberal/liberal democracy
Participatory democracy
Electoral democracy
Closed autocracy
Deliberative democracy
Egalitarian democracy
Equal enfranchisement
Elected government
Freedom and equality
Multi-party elections
Individual and minority rights
Inclusive institutions:
Property rights
Rule of law
Free markets
Checks and balances
Institutions decide how effectively constrained and what potential autocrats are elected - high education and strong private sector independent of state ensure good institutions
Agents of horizontal accountability:
courts, independent legislatures and election commissions
Civil society
Freedom of association/organisation
Adults have the right to run for elections
Alternative sources of information
V-Dem
and
Freedom House
measure democracy
Other-regimes:
Electoral authoritarianism
Dominant authoritarianism
Competitive authoritarianism
Positives of Democracy:
Higher development index
Generally known to have more economic development
Institutional framework
Inclusive institutions
Protection of civil rights and liverties
Higher degree of
Human capital
= productivity due to enhanced skills, knowledge and health
Technological innovation
Some autocracies do not want to modernise due to the organisation and power shifts at play i.e.
Russia
during the
Industrial revolution
Democracies are 'learning organisations' - freedom of speech and debate
Acemoglu and Robinson:
institutions and democracy are good for development
Governments are held more
accountable
with constraints on predatory rulers
Favourable position for scientific progress and innovation - British and
Industrialisation
, lack of fear of
modernisation
Right to vote = freedom of organisation = protection of private property = economic growth
Power dispersion = reductive ability of single actors to enforce their will at the cost of others
Conclusive thoughts:
No conclusive evidence on the correlation between economic growth and democracy due to wide variations in economic performances
On average higher rates than or equal to dictatorial regimes since 1850
What comes first, economic development or democracy? FORCE FOR or PRODUCT OF
Authoritarian regimes in
Asia
have done well promoting development
Evidence has found it hard to get any evidence on the negative effect on development from democracy
Modernisation theories
and
Karl Marx
see democracy as the outcome of development not democracy fostering development
Many factors influence development, hard to isolate influence of political regime type
Brazil is democratic but still suffers from issues of
income inequality
Wealth doesn't influence democratic transitions but can consolidate it
Dictatorships
vary more in their economic growth - hard to measure
Large spread in the literature
Empirical examples of democracies and of dictatorships with both good and bad economic growth records
No clear consensus on the relationship between democracy and growth looks like
Ambition and strategic vision of autocracies is rising
Negatives of democracy:
Lack of
state-autonomy
Lobbyism
Slower-decision making - influence of trade unions, and non-governmental organisations
Short-term investments - due to lack of savings
Obvious to subtle forms of repression
Rise of right-wing
populism
in
Europe and North-America
Western governments prioritising security over democracy
Unconstitutional pathways of gradual erosion of civil rights and rule of law
Seize upon civilian incompetence
Deprive institutional checks, political opposition, independent media and other sources of scrutiny and resistance in civil society
Military Coups
Responsible for 30% of
autocratisation of democracies
between 1994-2017
After 2010 popular uprisings though have increased in density have been less successful with struggle to get international suppourt
How good are the democratic achievements of poor countries?
New forms of corruption
Vote-buying - less opportunities for other forms of democratic manipulation
Politicians want to be re-elected so engage in
Clientelism
and
Patronage
GGA, WGI, GSI
Entrench dependency
Neo-liberal
Western
Controversial to say which regime protects property rights better
Subject to pivotal voting blocs or business sectors
Democratisation spread to countries without the enabling conditions for it
High-level of income per-capita
Education
Substantial middle class
Private sector
Cultural identification with liberal democratic values associated with Western Enlightenment traditions
Less protection of civil liberties, weaker rule of law, political polarisation, weaker accountability undermining the functionality of democratic institutions and the normative commitments that sustain them
Case-studies:
Singapore:
Representative democratic republic
Dominant party system
Limitations on the freedom of speech, association and assembly
Defamation laws
against political opponents
'Growth miracle'
from independence, eightfold increase in GDP per capita
Investment enhancements
Pro-business/FDI
Infrastructure projects i.e. expanding health services and education
And
China
insulate from public pressure
South-Africa:
Well-established
constitutional democracy
Economic development was weak
32.9% unemployment in the first quarter of 2023
Dual economy
World's highest inequality
India:
Narendi Modi
Try to repress Public dissent
Nationalist Hindu government
Instigated discrimination against the Muslim minority
Curtail
freedom of expression
and media independence
'Elephant of democracy'
due to its size, diversity and commitment to democratic principles
Assault on civil liberties and religious tolerance
Sierra-leone:
presidential representative democracy
, still many downfalls with its legislative and economic achievements
Beginnings:
Elections to re-legitimise colonialism
Early elections often succeeded as a mechanism to facilitate decolonisation and the peaceful transfer of power from colonial leaders to national leaders
1990s
Democratic transitions of
Benin, South-Africa and Ghana
to name a few
Most developing countries saw a degree of political liberalisation, not all stayed this way
1990-2005:
"Big bang"
of democratic expansion
2005-2019: over 10% decrease in democracies in 14 years
2008 financial crash effected democratic reputation
Positives/negatives of authoritarianism
Positives
lower
political accountability:
not under pressure to expand
immediate consumption
and can encourage long-term investments, independent of short-sighted electorates
Autonomy of the state:
Avoids pressure from
interest groups
, lobbying or forced/unfavourable outcomes
No independent unions = low wages + rich owners take large share of total income (assumption of savings rates increasing with income)= increased savings + investments
Asian-tigers
State-autonomy
Insulation from particularistic pressures
Negatives
Lack of agents constraining elected executives powers
Mass-media and non-governmental organisations reinforce horizontal accountability - lack in authoritarian regimes
Cripple freedom of association
Lower
human capital
Still subject to backing of particular groups and local knowledge matters
Predatory governments
Technological lag
May restrict the diffusion of information, in order to reduce threats to their own political survival
Democracy and inequity:
Minimalist democracy
struggles to tackle inequality, long-remarked by theories like
Karl Marx
Offset of inequality between racial groups but a growth of inequality within racial groups