There are many written works that focuses on democratization throughout the world, this essay will focus on two of them. The first article “Social Protection and Satisfaction with Democracy: a Multi-level Analysis” written by Kadri Luhiste explains that being a citizen of a democratic nation implies political rights, social rights and civil liberties. Luhiste defines democracy as a system of government in which the needs of the citizens’ are fulfilled and satisfied. A strong democracy is determined not by an agenda of things, but by an overall perception and satisfaction of an honest and supportive government. The second article “States and democracy: Democratization” by Francis Fukuyama explains that in a way democracy and state are very similar and intertwined, but are not exactly the same thing. The author describes democracy in terms of what a nation expects from its state and how those things are provided. Each and every factor of a democracy is measured on its own individual scale and each element is incorporated in different strengths to make a perfect democracy (i.e. Security must be present but not too strong).
Starting with the first article, the variables used was that: social protection is often a determinant in a citizen’s evaluation of the function of a democratic government. In numerous European countries a reasonable expectation for citizens is for their government to have a welfare system and social protection. There are very few non-democratic nations in the world that provide even basic levels of social protection for their citizens, whereas virtually every democratic nation has implemented some sort of a welfare state. Indicator: A study that was reviewed in this article shows that the more effective and extensive the social programs a nation offers, the more satisfied the citizens are with their government. Therefore, an acceptable indicator of a strong democracy and a way in which social protection can be measured, is the number of funds or resources a government puts into social and welfare protection. Second variable used in the article is Economic Performance: The well-being of a countries economy is a factor in the stance of the government and the health of democracy. When a country is economically successful it causes the population to be satisfied with the regime while economic failures cause them to doubt the effectiveness of the democratic government. Indicators: The measurement of the relationship between economic performance and democracy by comparing polls of satisfaction with the two are found in this article. With the information provided, the results showed that the better the economy, the more satisfaction people had with their democracy (Luhiste, 788). Third variable used is the Electoral Participation and Vote Choice: often affects many individuals’ perception about how democratic their government is and needs to be. The higher the number of voters there are, the more voices are heard, and the more accurate the government in power represents the voice of the people. How much votes are worth and how they are represented in the election of a government (first-past-the-post, proportional representation, etc.) can affect how true a democracy really is. In an electoral system that is first-past-the-post, the government can have a majority with less than half of the votes. People who voted for the party in power are more likely to feel that their government is effective and democratic (Luhiste, 788). Therefore, divided voting can very much affect a countries democracy. Indicators used: Participation in elections can be measured by the number of eligible voters that exercised their right to vote. Those who decided not to vote are more likely to be unsatisfied with the democratic performance of their government so voter participation has a direct correlation with the perceived democratic legitimacy of a government (Luhiste, 788). The overall percentage of the voters that voted for the winning party is another effective way of measuring this variable due to the fact that the more people that actually voted for the party in power, the more they will be accurately represented.
The second article starts with using Clientelism and Corruption as a variable: An indication of if a democratic society actually being a true democracy, is the number of clientelism and corruption that occurs. If those whom are elected receive their votes through promises of jobs, funding, or support to private groups or individuals, the democratic process is which in most cases, they are supporting private groups or individual. It most definitely not the fairest or most efficient use of money and resources for the state. Evidently, clientelism occurs in every nation in one way or another, as those running for office promise to make policies that assists a specific group of people (aboriginals, youth, families, etc.) with the hopes that they will win their votes. Indicators used: According to corruption, the amount of votes received through the means of clientelism is a good indicator of how strong democracy is in a country. The amount of government transparencies and reliabilities are also an indication of corruption. National Identity: is a variable of democratization, because a strong democratic governance often correlates to an exceptional national identity and the two are often linked with one another. For example: The United States, likes to flaunt their freedom, liberty, and democracy as part of their identity as a state. Essentially, nationalism is based off of the theory that political practices and ideologies have a relation with cultural and traditional practices and ideologies. If a country’s politics relates to its culture, tradition, and history, then it is considered a direct reflection of the people, making it the core of democratization. Indicators used: A powerful national identity can be viewed by the way citizens react to their government. The amount of negative input and action citizens make against their legislature is a direct reflection and measurement of this. On the off chance that individuals are frequently revolting or striking the democracy is not as solid. Be that it is may, some level of disappointment is healthy as it demonstrates that individuals are permitted to voice their concerns and opinions, as they must be allowed to for a democracy to be present.
The author in the second article incorporated many more conceptual variables to discuss democratization and depicted it as a specific feeling in a political situation and a perception of a strong and supportive government rather than a concrete definition. His thought is that as citizens, the population wants security, confinement in the leaders, and pride in their country, and if those elements are solid strong and present then the population as a whole is being represented appropriately. Luhiste incorporated the conceptual ideas of democracy like the second article, as well as the concrete concepts that people identify democracy as. Many of the variables the first article disserted were more substantial and less demanding to evaluate, such as social protection, economic performance and electoral participation. However, many of the indicators were likewise based on the idea of citizen satisfaction with every variable. In this sense, both authors view a strong majority rules system mostly as a citizen’s positive impression of their government rather than an agenda of elements.
Many of the variables that are based on theoretical ideas of democracy are challenging to dependably evaluate or measure. Corruption specifically is an exceptionally troublesome variable to gauge. While the number of votes received from clientelism is an imperative number, it is a number that is for all intents and purposes difficult to decide. Likewise, while surveys that measure the view of defilement in a country, for example, the CPI are valuable, they are never precise.
The second article portrays national identity as a variable that characterizes democratization. While the two are frequently associated, solid national character does not generally have a solid democracy. National character has a more grounded connection with culture than a democracy does, whereas a culture can exist and flourish in any political setting. It also states that a governments ability to protect its population from each other and external threats is a reflection of democracy. It additionally expresses that a governments capacity to shield its populace from each other and outer dangers is an impression of democratization. For example: The United States prides itself on being a strong global military power and that is something that is vital for its citizens. Nonetheless, numerous other democratic based countries do not concur with spending a large portion of tax payer’s dollars on the military. Correspondingly, a few governments that can police its populace mishandle this power and if a legislature applies too much control it is no longer an idea of a democratized nation.
The first article raises the uprising of social protection as an indication of democratization. This is frequently valid as far as numerous European nations and countries like Canada— many individuals advocate for more grounded social security in Canada. However, there are special cases to this, for example, the United States. The United States promotes itself as a firm democracy yet, a large percentage of its populace is not known for supporting social protection. Additionally, the article focuses on how electoral participation is a mirrored image of how powerful a democratic government really is. In spite of the fact that a government can be voted fairly, that does not ensure that they will, once in power, act in light of a legitimate concern for their population.
To conclude, there is no precise definition of democratization, it is viewed differently from various nations and individuals, a democracy encompasses many different variables. In general, the variables and indicators that were mentioned in both articles do well in giving a general idea of how democratization plays out and how to measure how democratic a nation and its politics are.