The main focus of this essay is to understand the role of Transnational Social Movements (TSM) on democracy and its impact at a national and a global level. To further understand this we firstly need to know the definition of Transnational Social Movements, democracy and the impact both at national level and global level. Secondly we need to know if transnational social movements produced “global democracy” and we need to frame democracy to better understand it. Lastly, a comparison between democracy and globalisation, and democracy on a national level and international level needs to be assessed.
Definition of Transnational Social Movement:
Transnational Social Movements are efforts made by a group of marginalized actors who aim at promoting some sort of political or social change. Although it is difficult to give one definition to what Transnational Social Movements are, there are some definitions for TSM that combined together may give us a better insight as to what Social Movements are. For example the common definition given by Wilson’s (1971:8) : ‘A social movement is a conscious, collective, organised attempt to bring about or resist large-scale change in the social order by non-institutionalised means.’, this definition got a more discerning characterisation which according to Wilson was as follows ‘Social movements nurture both heroes and clowns, fanatics and fools. They function to move people beyond their mundane selves to acts of bravery, savagery, and selfless charity. Animated by the injustices, sufferings and anxieties they see around them, men and women in social movements reach beyond the customary resources of the social order to launch their own crusade against the evils of society. In so doing they reach beyond themselves and become new men and women.’ Wilson’s (1971:5).
Paul Byrne also gives us somewhat a definition for social movements, for him social movements ‘…seem to be unpredictable, irrational, unreasonable and disorganised. They are ‘unpredictable, in that they do not always arise where there seems to be the greatest ‘need’; environmental movements have not always developed in societies with the greatest environmental problems, or women’s movements in societies where women are most disadvantaged, and so on. Irrational, in that their adherents do not seem to be motivated by self-interest or material advantage; unreasonable, in that their adherents appear to think they are justified in flouting the law or disregarding ‘normal’ ways of doing things; disorganised, in that they deliberately refrain from formalising their own organisations, even when it would seem advantageous to do so.’ Byrne (1997: 10-11). However just like Byrne mentions, one of the main problems any student of social movements faces is defining what a ‘social movement’ means, since the terms has been used for the last thirty years for manifold meanings.
1.1 Transnational Social Movements timeline/background:
To further understand better the role of Transnational Social Movements, we need to know how it was created and developed. Since transnational social movements are efforts made by collective action to fight circumstances of oppression, inequality and or situations where the social, political or economic requirements are not being encountered so they incorporate ‘an organized set of constituents pursuing a common political agenda for change over time’ (Batliwala 2012:3). Social Movements have existed throughout all history, some notorious examples include ‘the movement to end the transatlantic slave trade that had begun in the 16th century, movements of organised industrial workers beginning in the 19th century and movements to gain women’s suffrage (the right to vote and run for office), emerging in the late 19th century'(Naidoo 2006; Tripp 2006; Ghimire 2005).
When we are trying to understand social movements it is crucial to remember that it is an historical phenomena and it suffers constant change, as well as ‘are shaped by circumstance; they are contingent things, which grow or shrink in response to factors that enable or constrain them’ (Dütting and Sogge 2010: 31). To better understand Social Movements we need to take in consideration its historical context, and the changes in the outward environment (‘social movements must be understood in their own terms, namely, they are what they say they are’ (Castells 2010: 73).
The Transnational Institute timeline
2. Democracy
2.1 Definition of Democracy and background:
In order to understand what democracy is and its definition, we need to analyse the word itself and know why it appeared. The term democracy was created in ancient Greece (more specifically in the polis of Athens) around 508-507 BC. The word democracy (dēmo-kratia) derives from dēmos which refers to the people and krater meaning kratos which means “to rule”. This was created so that any citizen could speak to the assembly and have the power to vote on political and state related decisions simply by raising their hands, the majority would then make the decision as final. There were a total of nine proedroi, which were elected by the crowd, then they organised the set of procedures and made the voting. However only males with 18 years or older were allowed to participate in the democratic process.
Just like social movements there is not one global definition for democracy nowadays, however they are not very different from one another; according to the Oxford Dictionary democracy is ‘A system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives’. Democracy consists four key elements: The first is a political system to choose and replace the government through just and free elections. The second is the right for participation for all citizens aged over 18 years old. The third is the protection of human rights of all citizens the forth is the rule of law, in which the law must be applied equally to all citizens.
The last three decades of the twentieth century has witnessed the global spread of democratic institutions. On the 25th of April of 1974 when the Revolução do 25 de Abril (Carnation Revolution) took place in Portugal and ended Salazar’s dictatorship there were only 39 out of 145 countries classified as democratic. However this number increased by over 60 per cent in the following 23 years. This occurred especially in post-conflict countries, like Mozambique, Sudan and the Czech Republic. Moreover, the Cambodian genocide on the 17th of April 1975 the Khmer Rouge, also known as the communist party of Kampuchea, took control over Cambodia and created the state of Democratic Kampuchea in 1976, however the country was only ruled by the Khmer Rouge until January1979.
2.2. Framing democracy
Firstly we need to understand the concept of framing and then the types of framing in democracy.
Framing is an understanding of various concepts and theoretical perspectives combined together that explain how groups of people and societies organize, comprehend and communicate on how reality works, (framing is) ‘the strategic efforts by groups of people to fashion shared understandings of the world and of themselves that legitimate and motivate collective action’ (McAdam, McCarthy and Zald, 1996, p. 6). Framing is crucial because social movements try to replace ‘a dominant belief system that legitimises the status quo with an alternative mobilising belief system that supports collective action for change’ (Gamson, Fireman & Rytina).
2.2.1. Framing democracy dimensions
There are two dimensions for framing democracy; supranational, for example claim that ‘substantive democracy’ can be provided through ‘global civil society’ (Kaldor); and within countries, for example the Freedom House rankings and the way elections are motorised.
2.3. Procedural versus substantive democracy:
There are differences between democracy as a set of methods and democracy as a framework for a subjective notion of freedom. Quoting George Orwell’s point: [N]ot only is there no agreed definition but the attempt to make one is resisted from all sides…The defenders of any kind of regime claim that it is a democracy and fear they might have to stop using the word if it were tied down to any one meaning. (1957: 149).
Procedural democracy is a type of democracy in which the citizens have less influence than in other democracies, the citizens can only elect the representative of the state. This type of democracy has three principles for democratic decision making. The principles are: Universal participation, everyone should have the right to participate; Political equality, in which the individuals’ background should not count; Majority rule, the majority of the votes rules the decision. However this only happens in a Direct democracy where all members of the government meet to make decisions, in an Indirect Democracy also known as Representative Government, the citizens have the right and power to choose the representatives that will then make the decisions on their behalf. In the case of an Indirect Democracy another principle needs to be added which is the Responsiveness, where the state must respond to public opinion, they must do what the majority of the citizens want, regardless of what it may be.
An example of Procedural Democracy is Angola, even though the president Eduardo dos Santos states that the elections would take place in an environment free of violence, the Human Rights Watch has documented a different perspective in which they found clear signs of political violence. Another example is Mozambique with Joaquim Chissano, and Namibia with Sam Nujoma.
Substantive Democracy is the state reflection on the interest of the governed in practice, it evaluates democracy on the basis of substance of the government policies. Most theorists demand that the government must provide civil rights and liberties.
North Korea falls in this category. North Korea’s official name is the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea. While its constitution might pay lip service to elections and the importance of the people, it has no substantive democratic processes. This is common in many dictatorships where “elections” are held and the dictator is conveniently elected by 99% of the people for the 50th year in a row.
It’s easy to have laws and a constitution (the framework or procedures) which proclaim democracy as the guiding principle of government, which does not however mean it actually operates democratically (that the country is democratic in substance).
3. The globalisation of democracy
Globalization is a movement that approaches an economic, financial and trade integration. It is also a process which is driven by international trade and investment. It has many impacts on economic development, environment and political systems. This concept was created in the late 1800’s by American entrepreneur Charles Russell, but was only popularized in the 1960’s by economists and social scientists, like Martin Albrow and Theodore Levitt for example.
Globalization encourages authoritarian states to decentralize power as they hand over their control to make progress for the market, which is fundamentally democratic. This concept of allowing the economy to fluctuate is known as laissez-faire, laissez passer, a French expression meaning “let it be” which allows industries to be free from state involvement in restrictions such as taxes and state monopolies.
Globalization also fosters the promotion of democracy. Media helps people have access to a lot more information not only from their government but from all over the world. Other advantages of globalization in reducing borders is that is strengthens the distribution of democratic values over borders. The more democracies border non-democratic countries, the more the chances that country has of becoming democratic.
“Globalization encourages democratic institutions which promote democracy .As the global market relies on capitalist democratic values, it is inevitable that organizations that reinforce these values are rewarded meaning they can expand into countries with other forms of government and promote such ideals. Hence, the increasing involvement of INGO’s and other businesses furthers the transparency and liability of institutions which reduce state intervention, all which facilitate democracy.” (Kaldor) “Western policymakers and nongovernmental groups trying to promote greater political liberalization have placed their faith in the indirect effects of globalization. An authoritarian government agrees to a global regime to gain benefits of one sort but is forced to accept the political consequences that follow.” (Dalpino 2001).
4. Case Study:
Orange Revolution
This revolution took place on 22st of November 2004 in Maidan, Kiev’s main square in Ukraine, after the results from election came out and announced that Yanukovych had won over his opponent Yushchenko. However the exit polls showed Yushcenko winning the election by 11%. This made thousands of people to come to the streets and start protesting against this fraud with the purpose of the democratic side wining. This protests were supported by Yushchenko party and Pora (a youth activists movement). During this time it is important to mention that Yushchenko supporters maintain a non-violence civil resistance in opposition to Yanukovych using police force and threatening the lives of those who decided to protest against his victory. This resistance by the people forced the parliament to do another fair and fraud free election. For this to happen the elections were monitored all around the world and on December 26,2004 Yuschenko was proclaimed president of Ukraine.
Timeline:
On 21st of November or 2004, official results from Kuchma’s government showed that Yanukovych had won by 3%.On 22st of November Yushchenko’s supporters took to the streets in large-scale protest beginning to fight for a right to free elections.On 24 of November the Central Election Commission announced Yanukovych as the winner.On November 28, a high up government official (either the Interior Minister or the Chief of Staff) ordered troops to move in on the demonstrators. The higher ranks of soldiers refused the orders, however, and the attack never took place.On December 1, the parliament joined the side of the campaigners, passing a vote of no-confidence in Prime Minister Yanukovych ‘s government. On December 3, the Supreme Court followed suit, announcing that the election was fraudulent and Yanukovych’s “victory” could not be recognized. Following this decision, parliament set up a new run-off election for December 26.On December 26, 2004, observers from around the world monitored the elections in order to prevent fraud. When all votes had been counted—this time without manipulation—Yushchenko won, 52% to Yanukovych’s 44%. The “Orange Revolution” was successful.
Occupy Wall Street was another movement which took place in the USA, however this one failed.
In conclusion, transnational social movements has had its contributions to democracy, in monitoring elections and making them fair just like pointed out in the case of study. It also allows for the creation of new civil society actors. It can help giving advice and funding local social movement organisations, Due to all of this it is fair to say that TSMs have a big impact on helping promoting and expanding democracy at both levels, national and internationally. By starting at a national level it will lead us to a global stage because of the support and expansion given by other TSM around the globe in a self-reinforcing process.