Expert answer:Sociology discussion
Expert answer:You must address at least two different questions embedded in the lecture notesAdd opinionAt least 500 words
16_democracy_de_lecture.pdf
Unformatted Attachment Preview
Democracy?
I’d like to talk today about democracy. Usually when people use this term they mean it
in a positive way, for example, the United States is a democracy, or, Russia is not really a
democracy. However, this didn’t always use to be the case. In the 1830s and 1840s, the label
“democrat” was applied to some extreme left-wing organizations. To call someone a democrat
back then was sort of like calling someone a communist today. These days, however, almost
everyone claims to be a democrat, even those that are far from it. For example, North Korea,
one of the least democratic nations in the world calls itself the Democratic People’s Republic of
Korea.
Not only has democracy been nearly unanimously accepted as an ideal, it has become
popular as an actual system of government as well. According to Freedom House, where they
define a country as democratic if governments are elected by universal suffrage, there were no
democracies in 1900.1 Now, most people in the world live in democracies. See table below. In
this lecture I want to examine this expansion of democracy and look at where we are now as a
world. We will then consider the sociologist Immanuel Wallerstein’s understanding of the
history of democracy. We will end by thinking about what democracy might look like in the
future. Let’s begin by discussing the expansion of democracy.
1
Freedom House. 1999. “Democracy’s Century: A Survey of Global Political Change in the 20th Century.”
16 Democracy de
lecture
1
10/3/2016
Spread of Democracy
Samuel Huntington describes the spread of democracy as coming in three waves.2 In
his analysis, he defines “a political system as democratic to the extent that its most powerful
collective decision makers are selected through fair, honest and periodic elections in which
candidates freely compete for votes and in which virtually all the adult population is eligible to
vote.” Huntington counted a country as democratic if at least fifty percent of adult males are
eligible to vote and a responsible executive who either must maintain majority support in an
elected parliament or is chosen in periodic popular elections.3
2
http://soclinks.blogspot.com/2010/09/third-wave-democratization-in-google.html
3
These are criteria proposed by Jonathan Sunshine.
16 Democracy de
lecture
2
10/3/2016
The table below lists the three waves of democracy and the two reversions.
Table 1. Waves of Democracy
The first wave of democratization occurred from 1828 to 1926. The United States was
the first nation to become democratic in 1828. Other countries that democratized in the first
wave include: Australia, Canada, Sweden, Austria, France, Japan, Chile, and Hungary. By 1922,
there were 29 countries that were democratic. See table below.
16 Democracy de
lecture
3
10/3/2016
After this first expansion, Huntington notes some countries reverted to
authoritarianism. This reverse wave began in 1922 when Mussolini took over Italy. Other
countries that saw a reversion include: Belgium, Columbia, West Germany, Czechoslovakia, and
Estonia. These regime changes reflected the rise of communism, fascism, and military
dictatorships. This period of reversion lasted from 1922 to 1942. By 1942, there were only 12
democratic states remaining.
The second wave of democratization occurred from 1943 to 1962. Allied occupation of
Germany, Austria, Italy, Japan, and Korea promoted democratic institutions. Also, during the
second wave there were attempts at post-colonial democratization in India, Pakistan, Malaysia,
Philippines, Nigeria, Ghana, and others. By 1962, the number of democratic states increased to
36.
The second reverse wave begins in 1958 and goes up to 1975. In this reverse wave,
there are coups in Latin American countries such as Peru, Brazil, Bolivia, and Argentina. Thirtythree African countries also become authoritarian very shortly after independence. By 1973,
there were only 30 democratic states left.
The third wave of democratization starts in 1974, and we are still in that wave. The
third wave began with the overthrow of the Salazar regime in Portugal in 1974. Between 1974
and 1989, approximately 30 countries became democratic. Countries that became democratic
include Bulgaria, El Salvador, Mongolia, Papua New Guinea, and Sudan. By 1990, the number of
democratic states was up to 59.
The table above shows the number of democratic and non-democratic states for various
years. Huntington notes that though the number of democratic states have increased since
16 Democracy de
lecture
4
10/3/2016
1922, the percent has not. In 1922 it was 45.3 percent; in 1990 it was 45.4 percent. There are
some that have questioned Huntington’s analysis.4 An alternative method to measuring the
expansion of democracy has already been presented at the beginning of this lecture. The
Freedom House calculations suggest a different reality. According to them, there were no
democracies in 1900 and a little over 60 percent of countries were democratic in 2000. Their
numbers suggests a significant rise in percent of democratic states since the beginning of the
twentieth century. But even Freedom House numbers suggest that there were still close to 40
percent of countries in 2000 that were not democratic.
When we look at what has happened since 2000, we see that the democratic wave has
stalled. Freedom House analysis suggests that since 2000, there has been almost no increase in
the number of free countries. See figure below. Note that Freedom House categorized
countries around the world into three groups: free, partly free, and not free.
A Free country is one where there is broad scope for open political competition, a
climate of respect for civil liberties, significant independent civic life, and independent
media. Partly Free countries are characterized by some restrictions on political rights
and civil liberties, often in a context of corruption, weak rule of law, ethnic strife, or civil
war. A Not Free country is one where basic political rights are absent, and basic civil
liberties are widely and systematically denied.
Using Freedom House calculations, the percent of states that are classified as free has
been hovering around 45 percent for about ten years.
4
http://www.jstor.org/pss/25054118
16 Democracy de
lecture
5
10/3/2016
Have you ever visited a country where there were some restrictions on political rights
and civil liberties, often in a context of corruption, weak rule of law, ethnic strife, or civil war?
Why don’t you tell us about your experiences on our discussion forum.
Now that we have discussed the rise and prevalence of democracy, I would now like to
turn our attention to understanding the various components of democracy.
Rights Associated with Democracy
I would like to talk now about what democracy is. Huntington’s definition dealt only
with political participation. If a certain percent of citizens were eligible to vote for their
government officials, then that country was counted as a democracy. However, a democracy is
much more than that; as implied in the Freedom House definition of freedom given above, civil
liberties are also important. As we will see, social rights are also important. In this section, I
want to discuss the rights associated with democracy.
16 Democracy de
lecture
6
10/3/2016
If you want, why don’t you read the article on the internet by Immanuel Wallerstein
titled “Democracy, Capitalism, and Transformation”
(http://www2.binghamton.edu/fbc/archive/iw-vien2.htm). We will be looking at the article
fairly carefully as we talk today.
But before we get to the Wallerstein article, I want to begin with T. H. Marshall’s
discussion of citizenship rights. Marshal argues that there are three rights associated with
citizenship: civil, political, and social rights.
Civil rights
By civil rights, Marshall is referring to rights such as the right to speak against the
government, the right to practice whatever religion we want, the right to live and associate
with whomever we want. For most of us, we are largely unaware of the civil rights we enjoy
because it has been firmly established for so long. We take our civil rights for granted. But we
should remember that these rights are precious and valuable. When we visit a country where
we must be careful about what we say or we do, we realize how valuable our civil rights are.
Though most of us in the US have full civil rights, there are still some that don’t, or at least didn’t
until very recently. For example, gays and lesbians could not marry whomever they wanted in
many states until 2015. Massachusetts was only state where gay marriage was allowed in 2004.
Until recently, gays and lesbians could not openly express their sexual identity in the military.
There are others not allowed full civil rights today. There are still some people that, with the
passage of the Patriot Act, are not free from excessive surveillance and detention in the name of
fighting terror. Also, there are still times when individuals are not given due process under the
law by police officers. Furthermore, though the constitution guarantees us civil rights, our
employers sometimes take them away from us. For example, some employers restrict
16 Democracy de
lecture
7
10/3/2016
coworkers from dating each other, violating their right to free association. Or for example, some
schools may violate a student’s right to practice their religion of choice. In a recent case, a
Christian counselor was dismissed from graduate school because she refused to counsel a gay
person, citing her religious beliefs. Here is the link to the article:
http://ct.counseling.org/2013/01/resolution-of-emu-case-confirms-aca-code-of-ethicscounseling-professions-stance-against-client-discrimination/. Did the school violate this
student’s civil rights? Have you or someone you know been refrained from exercising your civil
rights? Post your comments to our discussion board.
Political rights
The second right associated with citizenship is political rights. By political rights,
Marshall is referring to the right to vote and the right to hold political office. Again, we take
our political rights for granted. These rights, however, are extremely valuable. If you are old
enough to remember, think about the outrage expressed by many when some people’s vote did
not get counted in the 2000 and 2004 elections due to corruption and technological problems.
Particularly in 2000, miscounting could have changed the outcome of the presidential election.
We sympathized with the outrage because we believe that the right for every person’s vote to
count is sacred. When we compare our voting system to others where corruption is routine, we
come to appreciate more how well our system works. However, if we think about it for a
moment, we notice that not everyone has the right to vote in America. There are many that
are not allowed to vote—children, people in prison (in almost all states), people with certain
criminal records (in many states), and non-citizens (though they may have lived almost all their
lives as legal residents). I am not convinced that giving these groups the right to vote is a terrible
idea. Problems like child poverty, high rates of incarceration, and unfair rules concerning noncitizens may be given more attention as politicians work for their votes. Who do you think
16 Democracy de
lecture
8
10/3/2016
should have the right to vote? Children, people in prison, people with certain criminal records,
non-citizens? Post your comments to our discussion forum.
Also, just as voting doesn’t really matter in North Korea, some have argued that voting
doesn’t really matter in the United States. Some believe that voting is a mere formality since
the winners have already been selected by those with political power or those with money. In
the United States, there are really only two choices: Democrat or Republican. They are really the
only two parties that ever win seats in congress. As of October 2016, in the House of
Representatives, there 246 Republicans, 186 Democrats, 0 independents, and 3 vacancies. In the
Senate there were 44 Democrats, 54 Republicans, and 2 independents. This is incongruous with
what America looks like politically; most Americans are not solid Democrats or Republicans.
And when we look at party identification, in 2015, more considered themselves independent (42
percent) than Democrat (29 percent) or Republican (26 percent) (see graph below).5
5
http://www.gallup.com/poll/188096/democratic-republican-identification-near-historical-lows.aspx
16 Democracy de
lecture
9
10/3/2016
Also, since money plays such an important role in elections, voting becomes less
important since it is usually the candidates that can raise significant sums of money that have
any chance of winning elections. Those that can’t raise money are almost always shut out. In
2014, it cost an average of $1,466,533 to win a seat in the House of Representatives and
$9,655,660 to win a seat in the Senate.6 What percent of Americans donate to political
campaigns? This year (2016, as of 9/21/16) about 0.4 percent of Americans donated $200 or
more. Their donations accounted for 70.3 percent of all political donations (see graph below).7
6
http://www.cfinst.org/pdf/vital/VitalStats_t1.pdf
7
https://www.opensecrets.org/overview/donordemographics.php
16 Democracy de
lecture
10
10/3/2016
What do you think matters more to winning elections: donating to campaigns or voting?
Post your comments to our discussion board.
Social rights
The third right associated with citizenship is social rights. By social rights, we are
referring to privileges such as clean water, free education, access to health care, and a
minimum standard of living. We have progressed the least with respect to social rights. As we
have been discussing throughout this course, many Americans lack basic social rights. There are
still some places where the drinking water is unhealthy to drink (e.g., Flint, Michigan). Still there
are many in the United States that do not have access to health care (though significant
numbers now have health insurance due to the passage of Obamacare). As we discussed on our
section on social stratification, there are many that live below the poverty line, and there are
many that, though they are given the opportunity for free education, cannot take advantage it
(for example, kids in inner city schools). What do you think? Should all citizens of the US be
guaranteed these rights? Why or why not? Post your comments to our discussion board.
16 Democracy de
lecture
11
10/3/2016
Democracy, Capitalism, and Transformation
I want to now discuss the Immanuel Wallerstein’s perspective on the expansion of
democracy. For him, democracy expands for very anti-democratic reasons. The capitalist elite
use various strategies related to democracy to expand capitalism and maintain their power.
First, the expansion of capitalism occurs as the capitalist elite give concessions to those that
demand democracy so that the elite will not be overthrown. Second, the expansion of capitalism
is about creating a group (the cadre) that provides a buffer between the elite and the masses of
poor people. The cadre, then, side with the elite politically. Third, democracy is an ideological
tool used by the capitalist elite to expand capitalism and maintain their power in traditionally
capitalist countries.
Let’s first look at the expansion of democracy as a history of concessions.
Expansion of Democracy as Concessions
Wallerstein reminds us that rights associated with democracy were not freely given to
anyone that wanted them, rather those without rights always had to struggle to obtain their
rights.
The expansion of civil rights
Let’s take a look at the expansion of civil rights. The right to practice whatever religion
you want and the right to free speech were hard-fought rights given to the people by the king in
power (and later, elected officials) after much protest. Civil rights are not simply given to
anyone that asks; rather, those without vigorously struggle for it, and eventually those in
power relent. The Civil War is an extreme example of what it takes sometimes to expand civil
rights, in this case, the right for those enslaved to be free. The Civil Rights Movement is a more
recent example of how the expansion of civil rights struggle. The message during the Civil Rights
Movement was that we will disrupt the functioning of society until full civil rights are extended
16 Democracy de
lecture
12
10/3/2016
to blacks: the right to go to the school in their own neighborhood, the right to eat at any
restaurant, the right to sit in the front of the bus. The Civil Rights Movement succeeded, in
part, because of the very real threat of chaos. That possibility was important in persuading
the powerful that opposed the movement to give in.
We were until recently in another civil rights battle. There were those that wanted to
deny civil rights to gays and lesbians (i.e., the right to marry) and those that wanted to expand
civil rights to include them. Gays and lesbians were not simply given the right to marry. There
was strong opposition. Just as blacks and their collaborators had to forcefully convince those
that resisted the right of all blacks to full civil rights, and just as women forcefully made the
same point about women’s rights at the same time, gays and lesbians and their allies needed to,
at certain points, strenuously make their claim for equality in order to defeat the resistance.
There is now a debate about the rights of transgender individuals. Do you believe that they
should have the right to use the bathroom of the gender that they identify with? What other
groups do you think are not given full civil rights? Post your comments to our discussion board.
Expansion of political rights
Let’s now take a look at the expansion of political rights. The right to vote here in the
United States was first only given to propertied white men. The right to vote gradually
expanded to non-propertied men, then black men, and eventually women. Each group without
the right to vote, along with their supporters, demanded their rights, and sometimes the conflict
became violent. For Wallerstein, the group with the advantage tries to hold on to their
16 Democracy de
lecture
13
10/3/2016
advantage, and when it looks like they will lose the fight, they give in so that they can hold on
to as much of their advantage as possible.8
Expansion of social rights
It is simply not enough to give the formerly excluded the right to live wherever they
want. It is simply not enough to give the formerly excluded the right to vote. What must also be
conceded are social rights. Civil and political rights seem pretty meaningless if you cannot
make enough money to buy food and pay the rent. So with civil and political rights, social rights
were also conceded. However, as with the other rights, there was always resistance. Here is an
article on the resistance to minimum wage laws:
http://www.dol.gov/oasam/programs/history/flsa1938.htm. What do you think about the
minimum wage? Do you think it is too low, too high? Post your comments to our discussion
board.
So the history of democracy, for Wallerstein, is a history of concessions. Those with the
benefits of democracy—civil rights, political rights, and particularly social rights—share some of
the benefits to those without it. Not out of some desire to create a more democratic state, but
for the exact opposite motivation—to hold on to their positions of privilege. For Wallerstein, the
expansion of the rights and benefits of democracy are concessions (intended to reduce
revolutionary inclinations) given to the disgruntled in order to avoid a disaster—their complete
loss of privilege.
8
Wallerstein describes this hypothetical debate that occurs between the elites as to whether rights
should be extended or …
Purchase answer to see full
attachment
How it works
- Paste your instructions in the instructions box. You can also attach an instructions file
- Select the writer category, deadline, education level and review the instructions
- Make a payment for the order to be assignment to a writer
- Download the paper after the writer uploads it
Will the writer plagiarize my essay?
You will get a plagiarism-free paper and you can get an originality report upon request.
Is this service safe?
All the personal information is confidential and we have 100% safe payment methods. We also guarantee good grades