Interrogating Democracy and Political Change

Is the global shift towards democracy irreversible, or are we witnessing a regression in democratic values and institutions?

This inquiry forms the core of scholarly investigations carried out by Larry Diamond in his work "Is the Third Wave Over?" and by Rose and Shin in their publication "Democratization Backwards: The Problem of Third-Wave Democracies.” Diamond, in the aforementioned article, examines the global state of democracy in the late 20th century and discusses Huntington’s concept of ‘waves of democratization’. As suggested by the title, Diamond questions whether the global ‘Third Wave of Democratization’ is facing challenges and whether it is already over. Similarly, Rose and Shin delve into the intricacies of these 'third-wave democracies' in their writing and contend that the democratization process is not always straightforward and linear; and further argue that backward and problematic processes of democratization can also occur. 

What was the meaning behind 'third-wave' democracies and how is it a major concern in the context of worldwide political change?

However, in order to expand on these perspectives, it is logical to determine first what was really the meaning behind ‘third-wave’ democracies.

According to Samuel Huntington, “waves of democratization” is:

“a group of transitions from nondemocratic to democratic regimes that occur within a specified period of time and that significantly outnumber transitions in the opposite direction during that period” (Huntington, 1991, 15) Waves of Democratization

In Diamond (1996) article, he mentioned that Huntington introduce three waves of democratization, the first one from 1828 to 1926 describe as a “long, slow wave” (Diamond, 1996, 20) , and the second surge from 1943 to 1964. Building on this idea, the third wave at post-1974 period, is clearly the preceding dramatic expansion of democracies after the previous two. This was seen as a major advancement in the global political landscape. It likewise represented a triumph of democratic values and the belief that democracy was not confined to particular region but could be embraced by diverse societies.

Figure 1: Waves of Democratization

https://havardhegre.net/2014/01/09/why-does-democratization-occur-in-waves/

Taking this into account, how is the ‘third-wave’ democracies considered a major concern in the context of worldwide political change?  In reality, there are a number of factors that have contributed to the concerns about Third Wave democracies. One is that many of these democracies were relatively weak and fragile from the start as per Rose and Shin (2001). They often emerged from authoritarian regimes that had left behind legacies of political instability, economic inequality, and social division. These factors made it difficult for these new democracies to consolidate and thrive.

Another concern is that the third wave of democracy coincided with a period of neoliberal economic globalization. Neoliberalism emphasizes free markets, limited government, and deregulation. While neoliberal policies have led to economic growth in some parts of the world, they have also exacerbated inequality and social unrest. This has made it easier for populist and authoritarian leaders to gain power in some "third wave" democracies (Rose and Shin, 2001).

In the context of worldwide political change, Poland, Hungary, and Turkey have all experienced a decline in democratic norms and institutions in recent years. For instance, the Polish government has restricted media freedom and packed the courts with its own loyalists. The Hungarian government has passed laws that discriminate against minorities and undermine the rule of law. And the Turkish government has cracked down on dissent and jailed journalists and opposition activists. Meanwhile, Venezuela was once considered to be one of the most successful Third Wave democracies. However, the country has since descended into authoritarian rule under President Nicolás Maduro. Maduro has rigged elections, persecuted his opponents, and destroyed the economy (Diamond, 1996).

Overall, the concerns about Third Wave democracies are a serious challenge for the global community. They are significant due to their impact on the trajectory of democracy worldwide. The potential regression or challenges faced by 'third-wave' democracies will have implications for the overall health of democracy worldwide. As Diamond stated, “fear its possible recession” (Diamond, 1997, p.5). If these democracies face significant obstacles or decline, it could signify a broader trend of democratic erosion or backsliding, which can have far-reaching consequences for the state of democracy on a global scale. Therefore, the ‘third-wave’ democracies are considered a major concern as they represent a critical juncture in the ongoing evolution of democratic governance and can influence the future direction of global political change. 

How did the two articles address the issue of democratization?

The two articles, "Is the Third Wave Over?" by Larry Diamond and "Democratization Backwards: The Problem of Third Wave Democracies" by Richard Rose and Doh Chull Shin, address the issue of democratization in different but complementary ways. Diamond argues on the issue of democratization that the expansion of democracy, notably liberal democracy, is anticipated to be limited in the foreseeable future. There exists the potential for a regression characterized by a reverse wave, or alternatively, a persistence in which democracy endures but undergoes a gradual shift towards reduced liberalism and increased artificiality.

However, as per Diamond (1996), the occurrence of a reverse wave, indicating a decline in democratic governance, may be avoidable. Theoretically, instead of a reverse wave, a period of equilibrium could follow a wave of democratic expansion. During such a phase, the overall number of democracies in the world remains relatively stable, without significant increases or decreases, in which he termed as “a period of stasis”.

Rose and Shin (2001), on the other hand, define democratization as:

"a process in which a political system becomes more democratic." (Rose & Shin, 2001)

They argue that democratization is a long-term process that is not always linear or straightforward. Rose and Shin argue that third-wave democracies are particularly vulnerable to backsliding because they are often weak and fragile. They also note that third-wave democracies are facing a number of new challenges, such as the rise of populism, the erosion of civil liberties, and the weakening of democratic institutions. That said, Rose and Shin (2001) argue that the best way to promote democratization is to strengthen democratic institutions and promote economic development. They also argue that it is important to support civil society organizations and to promote democratic norms and values.

What are the determinants or factors behind democratic regression/ backsliding/ backwardness as articulated in the articles?

The articles elucidate the determinants of democratic regression, backsliding, or backwardness by employing two distinct approaches: the institutional and attitudinal perspectives. In assessing democracies, political scientists utilize Schumpeter's institutional lens, measuring the institutionalization of democracy through election data, including party competition and the alternation of governing parties. Additionally, Dahl's influence is evident, with researchers constructing measures based on aggregate indicators of political institutions and performance to categorize countries on a spectrum of democraticness. 

On the other hand, the attitudinal approach, influenced by Almond and Verba, focuses on individual democratic attitudes. Survey researchers examine the presence or absence of democratic values in individuals, with emphasis on the democraticness of social behavior. The congruence theory of Harry Eckstein and the social capital work of Robert Putnam further underscore the role of democratic attitudes in shaping the health of democracies. Together, these approaches provide a comprehensive understanding of the multifaceted factors influencing the potential challenges and regressions experienced by democracies.

In essence, the determinants of democratic regression or backwardness are seen through the interplay of institutional factors, such as the functioning of political parties and overall governance, and attitudinal factors, including the presence or absence of democratic values in individuals. The articles suggest that both these dimensions contribute to a comprehensive understanding of the challenges and potential regressions faced by democracies.

How can the people, governments and non-state actors in the so-called  'third world' reverse this process (if at all it is possible)?

In order to reverse the potential democratic regression in the so-called 'third world,' it is imperative for people, governments, and non-state actors to actively engage in a process of consolidation, as outlined by scholars like Juan Linz and Alfred Stepan (1996). This consolidation involves fostering a shared belief among both elites and the general public that the democratic system is the most viable option for societal governance compared to any alternative. Thus, this commitment must extend beyond mere theoretical support and include a dedication to the specific rules and practices of the country's political system. In such way, it necessitates individuals not only believing in democracy but also adhering to and supporting the established rules and procedures without reservation.

The critical aspect of consolidation lies in reducing uncertainty about the workings of democracy, specifically the rules and methods of political competition. As this process advances, political actors increasingly assume that their counterparts will also adhere to democratic practices, transforming democracy from a tool for personal gain to a principled commitment to the democratic framework. Such a shift fosters enhanced trust and cooperation among political competitors and familiarizes the general population with democratic practices through both formal efforts and the day-to-day workings of democracy in politics and civil society. Despite contemporary reservations about the term "political culture," these elements of the consolidation process signify a noteworthy transformation in the conduct of politics within a society (Linz & Stepan, 1996).

In conclusion, the imperative to reverse potential democratic regression in the 'third world' hinges on the active pursuit of consolidation by people, governments, and non-state actors. It goes beyond mere theoretical endorsement, requiring a commitment to the specific rules and practices of the country's political system. By fostering adherence to these established norms, consolidation mitigates uncertainty about the functioning of democracy. This transformative process, marked by a shift from instrumental use to principled commitment, cultivates trust and cooperation among political competitors. As this unfolds, the general population becomes accustomed to democratic practices, signifying a notable evolution in the conduct of politics within a society. Through concerted efforts, the goal to secure and stabilize democracies established during the 'third wave,' in order to avert potential reversals in the historical trend of democratic progress might be possible to achieve.

Overall Critical Assessment and Evaluation 

Larry Diamond's "Is the Third Wave Over?" benefits from the author's prominence in the field and publication in the reputable Journal of Democracy which suggests a certain level of academic rigor. Moreover, the article provides valuable insights into the challenges facing third-wave democracies that are historically significant. Meanwhile, Rose and Shin's "Democratization Backwards: The Problem of Third-Wave Democracies," published in the British Journal of Political Science, also implies a commitment to scholarly standards. However, being published in 1996 and 2001, these articles may face a limitation in terms of their direct applicability to contemporary developments. Nonetheless, it is noteworthy that the unfolding narrative of these papers has positioned them as exemplary benchmarks or foundational works, laying a solid groundwork for subsequent and recent publications. Their enduring impact is evidenced by their continued relevance, serving as a robust reference point for the ever-evolving landscape of scholarly discourse especially in the talks of third wave democracies.

References:

Diamond, L. (1996). Is the third wave over?. Journal of Democracy, 7(3), 20-37.

Diamond, L. (1997). IS THE THIRD WAVE OF DEMOCRATIZATION OVER? An Empirical Assessment. The Helen Kellogg Institute for International Studies. Kellogg Institute. 

Huntington, S. (1991).  The Third Wave: Democratization in the Late Twentieth Century (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1991), 15

Linz, J.J., and Alfred C.S. (1996). Problems of Democratic Transition and Consolidation: Southern Europe, South America, and Post-Communist Europe. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press. 

Rose, R., & Shin, D. C. (2001). Democratization backwards: The problem of third-wave democracies. British journal of political science, 31(2), 331-354.