Inglehart and Welzel have basically focused on a research findings and theoretical based approach in explaining that democracy and economic development do share a strong link. According to them, democracy can’t exist without certain social and cultural conditions, and the U.S. government trying to create a democratic system in Iraq was clearly unsuccessful due to the absence of these conditions. This article highlights a heavy link between democracy and modernization, which is economic development. Furthermore, modernization leads to “occupational specialization, urbanization, rising educational levels, life expectancy and rapid economic growth” . This concept is further constructed by authors using empirical evidence, which clearly shows that the social and cultural conditions required for democracy to be in place are a result of steady modernization. According to the authors, in reality, ‘modernization’ leads to increased political awareness and participation, leading to a higher level of democratic awareness within the country.
Handelman employs a more descriptive approach, laying down the foundations of democracy but making it evident how, in the past different African, Asian and Latin American Nations achieved the power of democracy. The concept is enforced by highlighting how dictators such as Pinochet of Chile and Milosevic of Serbia have been tried in the International Court of Law, for crimes against humanity; something not common in democratic systems. In some cases, this change of leadership has, like in the Philippines, has been triggered by mass public protests, under the supervision of a democratic leader, and these have resulted in eventual transfer of power. However, in Latin American countries, the process of democracy is different and Handelman says: “(In Latin American Nations) democracy often grew out of negotiations between the outgoing authoritarian government and opposition leaders, often culminated by a gradual and peaceful transfer of power” . In essence this definition covers what educated masses stand up for, directing a mention towards the fact that enlightened masses and political awareness is a result of economic development, contributing positively to democracy. That is exactly what was dictated on the basis of evidence in the previously mentioned article.
Therefore, its conclusive that based on the views of the writers, democracy and economic development share a positive relationship, with the success of democracy being highly dependent upon economic development. However, Handelman rejects this claim partially by stating that many Third World Countries with politically aware citizens have had their voices stifled. China is regarded as the appropriate example because political consciousness in this case resulted in deaths and killings, in the Tiananmen Square Massacre .
Handelman in his chapter discusses the broad and procedural definitions of democracy and in doing so established two different concepts; ‘liberal’ and ‘electoral’ or ‘semi’ democracies . According to the writer, media influences and hampering of civil liberties most often results in incomplete democracy. He avidly declares that liberal democracy is preferred on the basis that it openly allows people to practice their civil rights and there is a presence of free media, along with competition between the leading parties contesting for those elections. Therefore, his perspective focuses on a more political institutional based approach so as to define the characteristics necessary for democracy to prevail. Moreover, he relies on another factor as well; the economic influences that include the democratic waves. According to him, the First democratic wave, came about as a result of the French, American and Industrial Revolution, and ended upon the start of the economic depression of the 1920s . An obvious link is established between the presence of economic welfare and democracy. In these periods, democracy apparently couldn’t manage due to the economic crisis. An important finding related to the National Income in recent years was that nations with a rising level of National Income were known to be prone to successful democracy. There are two reasons why democracy might succeed in these areas, and that is the fact that class boundaries are less pronounced, and the people are more educated and aware . Thus, the central reliance of this article was on economic factors and on political institutions that constitute the definition of democracy.
On the other hand, Ingelhart and Welzel cover a completely economic based approach, ignoring the influence of political institutions in the concept underlying the basic form of democracy. Cultural factors are brought under discussion, but on a minor basis. This is noticeable when the importance of education is discussed as follows: “Cross national differences are robust and enduring, and they are closely correlated to the society’s level of economic development: people in low income societies are much likelier to emphasize religion and traditional gender roles than are people in rich countries” . This example can be drawn upon by mentioning that the essence of free and fair elections in undermined when areas with low economic development are observed because those people will preferably vote for a man than a woman, as their leader. This brings in the representation of culture and societal factors. Lastly, the concept of ‘effective’ and ‘electoral’ democracy has been discussed. According to the writers, electoral democracy can exist anywhere in the world, but effective democracy is different, because it has certain requirements that include ‘developed infrastructure’ and ‘an emphasis on self-expression values’ . The core of these factors is definitely found in economics.
So it can be concluded that both the references taken have their own perspectives regarding the core characteristics necessary for forming democracy, but some common aspects were witnessed. Both realized that there is a need for educated masses, a higher level of national income and economic growth, and lastly either one laid a minor focus on cultural and institutional factors. In essence, the basic definition of democracy is not considered appropriate by the writers, i.e. ‘free and fair elections’ or ‘vote for the people by the people’. Technical definitions and concepts have been the focus, while giving real instances of their applications in the world, to aid in adequate understanding.
Handelman, H. (2011). Chapter 2: Democratic Change and the Change to Democracy. In H. Handelman, The Callenge Of Third World Development (pp. 28-55).
Inglehart, R., & Welzel, C. (2011). How Development Leads to Democracy: What we know about Modernization. In R. J. Griffiths, Annual Editions: Developing World 11/12 (pp. 7-12).
