| Summary: | The article contends that economic development does not necessarily have to precede democracy. Dispelling the development first, democracy later argument is critical not only because it is wrong but also because it has led to atrocious policies. why has the development-first myth prevailed? First, it rests on a common-sense notion, put forward by political socialogist Seymour Martin Lipset and others, that economic growth creates the necessary preconditions for democracy by expanding litetacy, creating a secure middle class, and nurturing cosmopolitan attitudes. As compelling as the development-first thesis sounds, the empirical evidence is clear: democracies consistently outperform autocracies in the developing world. The more representative, transparent, and accountable governmental processes are, the more likely policies and practices will respond to the basic priorities of the general population. A development strategy presupposes not only that poor countries can successfully democratize but also that democracy brings political checks and balances, responsiveness to citizen priorities, openness, and self-correcting mechanisme--all of which contribute to steady growth and superior living conditions.
|
|---|