Democracy: Guaranteeing Free Elections and Civil Rights

Democracy is the form of government where the citizens; have the power and right to regularly replace the government representatives via free elections, the electoral system is fair and robust, and where civil rights, freedom, and liberties are safeguarded. There are several forms of democracy which include the procedural democracy and the substantive democracy. In procedural democracy, those people in authority ensure all rules and procedure of the electoral process are dully observed. Nevertheless, in substantive democracy, not only does the formality of elections matter but also the protection and promotion of socio-economic rights alongside safeguarding of basic liberties through a powerful set of rule of law like the constitution (Rodriguez, 2015, p. 2). The freedom house index uses political rights together with civil liberties ratification as the gauge for democracy in various nations.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Order now

The correlation and relationship between democracy and economic growth and sustained development, has generated a debate between scholars and economists which is undeniably far from simple and impossible to clearly state whether it is a positive or a negative relationship. Economic growth is measured as the average increase rate of real Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of a country over a particular period of time (Arif & Kayani, 2012, p.201). Also, development is the process where the life qualities of humans (literacy, income distribution, and life expectancy) and their potential are bettered through the raising of their self-esteem, sustenance, and freedom. The third wave of democratization has been experienced in the majority of countries since the 1980s where democracy has been adopted by most of these countries as their form of governance (Arif & Kayani, 2012, p.201). This movement of many democratic countries towards development in a view to foster more development has further increased the importance of the debate "between democratic government and authoritarian regimes, which is well-equipped to promote economic growth? And what are the major institutional systems responsible for such economic achievement?" (Arif & Kayani, 2012, p.199). The essay will discuss in details on this matter deriving information from various economists' researches on the relationship between democracy and economic growth where some argue that the relationship is positive while others maintain that it is negative and others find no coherent relationship between the two.

These three arguments are classified into three democracy-economic development relationship schools of thoughts (Arif & Kayani, 2012, p.201). The first school of thought shows a direct correlation between democracy and economic growth. This school of thought encompasses both the positive impacts and negative effects that democracy has on economic growth and development. They are classified into compatibility perspective (positive impacts) and conflict viewpoint (negative effects). Under compatibility perspective, some economists argue that in developing nations, democratic authority is likely to foster economic growth and sustain development (Arif & Kayani, 2012, p.202). Their viewpoint is based on the factors associated with democracy like improvement of education levels and an increase of life expectancy by bettering the health care conditions and living conditions hence increasing productivity hence improved economic growth (GDP per capita income).

Another reason that supports the compatibility perspective is where a democratic government allows economic freedoms for entrepreneurs and companies like market competition and property rights which are essential conditions for economic development. In democratic regimes, the function of the government is a representation of the interests of the citizen. This enables people to vote out corrupt regimes and cronies who are only after wielding nation resources to enrich themselves rather than creating development strategies to foster economic growth and replacing them with those leaders that have their interests at heart through fair elections (Todaro & Smith, 2014, p. 568). Furthermore, freedom of press and expression provided by democratic regimes creates the possibility of public debates that helps in a constructive reflection of political policies and other human rights hence aiding in development. Examples being mitigation of natural phenomena like floods through reporting on the free press and also enabled understanding of some basic rights (right to basic education) also through press briefings and discussions (Todaro & Smith, 2014, p. 569). This perspective is supported by Botswana which is the fastest growing country in Africa through proper utilization of the democracy policies.

The conflict viewpoint proclaims that democracy impedes economic development. Less Developed Countries (LDCs) democracies tend to increase the needs of the people like the special interest groups leading to high government expenditures. Freedom means newly acquired power over the government by these groups like freedom of expression through strikes by workers who may demand better wage conditions when the economy can't sustain their demands. This leads to long standoffs when they have downed their tools, leading to reduced productivity and decreased economic growth(Arif & Kayani, 2012, p.202). Another negative effect of democracy on economic growth in LDCs is the power given to special groups of democratic regimes that may enable them to seize wealth and property of certain property-owners who somehow contributed to economic growth. This perspective is reinforced by Venezuela where the democratic government has a less pragmatic approach to development ideologies resulting in the crumbling economy (Zovatto, 2018).

The second school of thought shows the indirect correlation between democracy and economic growth and development. These are factors that are influenced by democracy and hence, in turn, lead to economic development. They include; human input (affected through basic needs provision), political stability, government capacity, institutions, and quality, investment, income inequity, and business openness (Arif & Kayani, 2012, p.203). The last school of thought is the 'skeptical' perspective that asserts that there is no correlation or relationship between democracy and economic growth. The school argues that democracy alone doesn't influence economic growth but creates institutions that in turn generate working strategies that lead to economic development (Arif & Kayani, 2012, p.205). This is where democracy through elections leads to the formation of political regimes that develop good development policies leading to development.

The correlation analysis of the relationship between democracy and economic growth and development shows a widespread view between economists. It shows that democracy is expected to promote economic growth in one hand and have a noteworthy effect on some factors like political stability, human input, and government structure and quality that sequentially sustain economic development. On the other hand, some other factors of democracy like effects associated with special interest groups are likely to hinder economic growth. This shows a lack of a strong and healthy relationship between democracy and economic growth.

References

Arif, B. W., & Kayani, F. N. (2012). The Interrelationship between Democracy and Economic Growth: Theories and Empirics. Pakistan Journal of Social Sciences, 32(1), 199-208.

Rodriguez, R. A. (2015). A brief review of substantive democracy and some of its theories. National Council of Science and Technology, 44(5), 1-29.

Todaro, M. P., & Smith, S. C. (2014). Development Policy making and the Roles of Market, State, and Civil Society. In Economic Development (12th ed., pp. 567-569).

Zovatto, D. (2018, November 21). Latin American democracy faces its midlife crisis. Retrieved May 10, 2019, from https://www.idea.int/news-media/news/latin-american-democracy-faces-its-midlife-crisis