Today's Paper Latest stories Obits Traffic Wally Hall Newsletters Weather Puzzles + games

The most important development of our age has been the "Global Democratic Revolution."

There were only 30 democracies in the world in 1975, according to Samuel Huntington's estimate in The Third Wave: Global Democratization in the Late 20th Century. By the time that important book was published in 1991, the number had doubled to 60. At last count, it had nearly doubled again, to 115.

For the first time in human experience, democracy is the most common form of government and most people now live under it. The ideas contained in the Declaration of Independence conquered the world to an extent that likely would have astounded even Thomas Jefferson and James Madison.

Except for the places they haven't, at least thus far, raising perhaps the most interesting question in political science: If democracy is, as Francis Fukuyama claimed, the form of government most compatible with human nature, why do certain countries and regions still resist it? Why haven't all the wagon trains, to use Fukuyama's metaphor, reached California?

The most conspicuous holdout is, of course, what is somewhat peculiarly called the "Islamic world." Indeed, only a few, if any, of the world's 50-plus Muslim majority countries can be considered stable, multiparty democracies.

Since there are roughly 190 existent nation-states, and 115 or so now democratic, that means that the authoritarian residual is overwhelmingly Muslim; a condition especially true for the states located in the Middle East, the historic core of the faith.

The Arab Spring that broke out in Tunisia in late 2010 and spread throughout the region appeared to represent the beginning of belated change in that respect, only to be followed by the crushing disappointment of the Arab Winter, as the liberal young people demonstrating in Tahrir Square gave way to the Muslim Brotherhood and General Abdel el-Sisi, the Islamic State, chaos in post-Gadhafi Libya, and the ongoing horrors of civil war in Syria.

Even the one Muslim-majority country that has long been cited as the exception to the rule, Mustafa Atatürk's explicitly secular Turkish republic, has become both increasingly Islamist and authoritarian under Recep Erdogan.

The question of the relationship between Islam and democracy is thus hardly an insignificant one, especially since research carried out over time by the Pew Center indicates troublingly high levels of support for Koranic Law in most Muslim majority countries.

The defining feature of any democratic process remains the idea of "man-made" law--that is, law made by elected legislatures--but Koranic law presumes that law can come only from God (Allah), thereby defining the man-made kind as inherently blasphemous.

The possibility that culture poses an impediment to democratization also surfaces when considering the other conspicuous holdout to the world's democratic trend, China.

Singapore's Lee Kuan Yew maintained that the quasi-religious content of Confucianism and its emphasis upon stability and obedience to authority meant a reduced appeal of Western democracy for people in Asian societies.

What was called "Asian values" thus represented an explicit challenge to western developmental theory, wherein capitalist industrialization eventually fostered democracy.

The key premise in developmental theory was the tight sequential relationship between capitalism and democracy, since it was capitalism--including the concept of private property and the pursuit of profits--that drove industrial development and produced a commercial middle class (Marx's bourgeoisie) that eventually demanded rights, including the right to vote.

In short, no capitalism, no bourgeoisie and, as Barrington Moore famously put it, "no bourgeoisie, no democracy," which is another way of saying that there has never been a democratic state without a fundamentally capitalist economy.

Alas, China now has the world's largest middle class, estimated at more than 400 million, fueled by 40 years of increasingly capitalist growth. But we are nearly three decades past Tiananmen Square and, the tenets of developmental theory notwithstanding, there are precious few signs of Chinese democratization; rather, Xi Jinping has now proceeded to amass greater personal authority than any Chinese tyrant since the Great Helmsman himself.

The incongruity of an increasingly capitalist, booming China presided over by a communist party therefore continues, implicitly challenging our longstanding assumption that Western values are universal values.

If the global democratic revolution has petered out, it will likely be a loss of momentum attributable to cultural impediments (including Russia's "authoritarian relapse" under Vladimir Putin, which Kremlinologists have blamed on Russia's persisting authoritarian political culture).

Culture can, however, be changed and thereby overcome. Although Max Weber once speculated that the values encouraged by Catholicism prevented the industrialization of European Catholic countries, Huntington's "third wave" actually began on the Iberian Peninsula, with the collapse of the sclerotic Franco and Caetano dictatorships in Spain and Portugal, and spread immediately thereafter to a predominantly Catholic Latin America.

As with so much else, a certain wisdom came from Daniel Patrick Moynihan when he said: "The central conservative truth is that it is culture, not politics, that determines the success of society," but that "the central liberal truth is that politics can change a culture and save it from itself."


Freelance columnist Bradley R. Gitz, who lives and teaches in Batesville, received his Ph.D. in political science from the University of Illinois.

Editorial on 04/23/2018

Print Headline: Democracy and culture

Sponsor Content


You must be signed in to post comments
  • GeneralMac
    April 23, 2018 at 9:02 a.m.

    Russia, China, Cuba, North Korea

    Four non-Muslim countries who are far from being democracies.

    China's tight control on religious freedom rarely gets mentioned in the US.

  • Dontsufferfools
    April 23, 2018 at 9:29 a.m.

    The U.S. likes to hold itself up as a paradigm of democracy. Abroad, though, observers see a facade with moneyed interests pulling the puppet strings of our government by funding campaigns, "grass roots" movements (Kochs), and controlling policy (Mnuchin at Treasury, Pruitt at EPA, Mulvaney at CRPB). The Trump administration's main triumph so far has been to lower the corporate tax rate from 35% to 21%. Nuff said.

  • RobertBolt
    April 23, 2018 at 10:04 a.m.

    Gitz certainly has a rosy outlook about the status of democratic governance, especially considering this report (which happens to be from The Independent but is widely reported in other mainstream sources):
    "The United States has been classed as a 'flawed democracy', falling short of the threshold of a fully democratic society for the second year running, according to a comprehensive new report.
    The Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU) produces an annual review ranking countries on their adherence to 60 distinct democratic values, including electoral processes and press freedom.
    The US scored of 7.98 out of 10 last year, dropping into the flawed democracy category for the first time. The change reflected what the report said was “a sharp fall in popular confidence in the functioning of public institutions”. This predated and aided the election of Donald Trump, according to the think-tank.
    The US scored 7.98 again in 2017, placing it behind 19 full democracies including Norway, Ireland, the UK, Uruguay and Spain.
    Now ranking 21st, the US was among other countries with flawed democratic systems including Italy, South Korea, France, Chile, Botswana and Mexico."
    Our nation is no longer the democratic front-runner we pretend to be. In fact, we are merely one of the also-rans stumbling further behind in the pack, and Trump with his idolization of dictators and strongmen is doing all he can to clothesline all the truly democratic runners.

  • RBear
    April 23, 2018 at 12:35 p.m.

    "The defining feature of any democratic process remains the idea of 'man-made' law--that is, law made by elected legislatures--but Koranic law presumes that law can come only from God (Allah), thereby defining the man-made kind as inherently blasphemous."
    Substitute "Koranic" with "Judeo-Christian" and you have the type environment that Rapert and others would like Arkansas to become.

  • WhododueDiligence
    April 23, 2018 at 4:04 p.m.

    In 1953 Iran had an emerging democracy which was wiped out when Iran's democratically elected Prime Minister was overthrown by the British and the US CIA. This controversial overthrow was ordered to maintain British control of Iran's oil but it backfired heavily and became a disaster in 1979 when autocratic anti-Western forces gained control of Iran. The Soviet invasion of Afghanistan also began in 1979, along with the start of the long and bloody Iraq-Iran War--in which the US supported Saddam's Iraq--around that same time. It was a bad sequence of events for the Middle East, which was further destabilized by the 2003 US invasion of Iraq.
    Also, as Gitz has addressed previously, World War 1 with it's subsequent reckless divvying up the fallen Ottoman Empire also had disastrous lasting effects on the region. Foreign nation-building attempts have failed ever since.

  • carpenterretired
    April 23, 2018 at 10:10 p.m.

    Seem to recall Hillary got about three million more votes than Trump ,go fish.