What is Democratisation?
Democratisation is the process by which political regimes and societies move from non-democracies to democracy. This process is often slow and requires considerable patience as the societal institutions needed to support a democracy take shape. Democracy involves compromise and cooperation, as well as trust and respect between society and government. It also demands citizens to contribute, both financially and in terms of their participation in democratic processes.
There is much debate about the factors that affect a country’s level of democratisation. Some of these are economic, some political and some cultural. Some argue that industrialisation drives democratisation, while others point to the need for political and social reforms to be in place before a country can democratise. A number of studies have attempted to measure the rate of democratisation and find that a high degree of democracy is associated with higher economic growth, greater prosperity and improved living standards.
The process of Democratisation is usually slow and requires substantial commitment from all parties involved. It can be impeded by a lack of public awareness and education, or by a failure to provide incentives for people to participate in politics. Another major obstacle is the existence of entrenched interests in a society that may oppose democratisation, such as powerful religious or ethnic groups. Finally, a democracy is not something that can be imposed from outside, but must be nurtured by societal institutions that promote democracy and encourage the development of a sense of civic nationalism.
Some of the most difficult questions to answer about Democratisation concern its justification. There are two broad ways that justifications for democracy can be developed: instrumentally, by reference to the benefits it provides compared with other methods of political decision-making; and intrinsically, by reference to the values that democracy embodies. Both of these arguments can be valid, but it is important to distinguish them.
Instrumental justifications for democracy emphasize the advantages of a well-functioning democracy in terms of economic performance, as well as the protection of core liberal rights such as freedom of expression, privacy and bodily integrity. These arguments are frequently based on statistical analyses of the data gathered by researchers. They are sometimes criticized for their lack of theoretical foundation, as well as for the fact that they rely on the assumption that democratic countries are generally more stable than non-democratic countries.
Some scholars have argued that these arguments are essentially the same as those used to justify democracy itself. This argument, based on Mill’s essay On Liberty (1859), argues that democracy is justified as a means to an end – the creation of a society that is free, fair and just. This argument, however, is less widely accepted than the economic justifications for democracy. Moreover, it has been argued that a number of the claims made for the importance of democracy are largely subjective and based on personal values rather than objective criteria. Furthermore, it has been argued that democracy is not necessarily a good thing for all societies or all people.
Democratisation is the process by which political regimes and societies move from non-democracies to democracy. This process is often slow and requires considerable patience as the societal institutions needed to support a democracy take shape. Democracy involves compromise and cooperation, as well as trust and respect between society and government. It also demands citizens to contribute, both financially and in terms of their participation in democratic processes. There is much debate about the factors that affect a country’s level of democratisation. Some of these are economic, some political and some cultural. Some argue that industrialisation drives democratisation, while others point to the need for political and social reforms to be in place before a country can democratise. A number of studies have attempted to measure the rate of democratisation and find that a high degree of democracy is associated with higher economic growth, greater prosperity and improved living standards. The process of Democratisation is usually slow and requires substantial commitment from all parties involved. It can be impeded by a lack of public awareness and education, or by a failure to provide incentives for people to participate in politics. Another major obstacle is the existence of entrenched interests in a society that may oppose democratisation, such as powerful religious or ethnic groups. Finally, a democracy is not something that can be imposed from outside, but must be nurtured by societal institutions that promote democracy and encourage the development of a sense of civic nationalism. Some of the most difficult questions to answer about Democratisation concern its justification. There are two broad ways that justifications for democracy can be developed: instrumentally, by reference to the benefits it provides compared with other methods of political decision-making; and intrinsically, by reference to the values that democracy embodies. Both of these arguments can be valid, but it is important to distinguish them. Instrumental justifications for democracy emphasize the advantages of a well-functioning democracy in terms of economic performance, as well as the protection of core liberal rights such as freedom of expression, privacy and bodily integrity. These arguments are frequently based on statistical analyses of the data gathered by researchers. They are sometimes criticized for their lack of theoretical foundation, as well as for the fact that they rely on the assumption that democratic countries are generally more stable than non-democratic countries. Some scholars have argued that these arguments are essentially the same as those used to justify democracy itself. This argument, based on Mill’s essay On Liberty (1859), argues that democracy is justified as a means to an end – the creation of a society that is free, fair and just. This argument, however, is less widely accepted than the economic justifications for democracy. Moreover, it has been argued that a number of the claims made for the importance of democracy are largely subjective and based on personal values rather than objective criteria. Furthermore, it has been argued that democracy is not necessarily a good thing for all societies or all people.