The value of democracy has been taken for granted. Overall, democracy is seen as superior and has emerged in the global arena as the gold standard for legitimate government. 1 This type of political system is not just seen as valuable for âits own sakeâ, but also because it brings all kind of âgood thingsâ. If a dictatorship collapses, then the choice for a democratic system will eventually lead to many positive outcomes. The final destinations will be diverse, though all wonderful. They will go everywhere, but sooner or later the clouds will disappear, the sun will shine, and the skies will be bright and blue. The list is long: democracy will give the country economic development and growth, control of corruption , political stability, national security, international peace, domestic peace and order, victory in war, international legitimacy , respect for human rights, gender equality, more social welfare and less inequality, protection of the environment, social capital, andânot irrelevantâit makes people happier (see Carbone 2009). 2
Democratic systems are considered the best. So far, there has been no real alternative, no serious opponent, and it seems none of the other types of political systems have been working better than the democracies. As Winston Churchill eloquently put it during a parliamentary debate more than seven decades ago: âIndeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time â (Churchill 1947). This is a commonplace thesis, not only based on Churchillâs famous quote but also firmly rooted in academic work. Scholars tend to support this ideaâoften implicitly, sometimes explicitly like the political scientist Larry Diamond: âFew people in the world today celebrate authoritarianism as a superior system, the ultimate destination, the best form of government. Democracy remains the only broadly legitimate form of government in the worldâ (Diamond 2014). But is it true? Better for whom, in what way and according to which criteria? What is the empirical support for this persistent idea that âdemocracy is bestâ?
The overarching goal of the book is to investigate the value of democracy in comparative perspective. This is not an easy task, asâagainâthe declared destinations as mentioned in the literature are all over the place, 3 leaving a quite chaotic picture. 4 This is caused not just by the dozens of different alleged claims of what democracy would, could and should bring, but also by the fact that scholars seem to be determined to show that the democratic system is simply the best. The empirical studies focusing on the value of democracy are more normative and ideological than they make us believe, and I will come back to this issue in the concluding Chapter 7. A final challenge of the theme which is at the core of this book is that the analyses and findings are spread out over different disciplines. Those disciplines have hardly interacted with each other reflecting on this theme, let alone that they have come to some overall conclusions.
The investigation in this book is based on systematic analyses of hundreds of empirical, statistical studies as published in dozens of international journals (covering different disciplines like not only political science , especially comparative politics and international relations , but also within sociology , economics and law). Invariably, one of the key explanatory variables across these studies is the extent of democracy or the type of political system. The sheer quantity of studies across disciplines is striking, and the evidence tends to be contradictory and confusing. This book will break new ground by presenting the findings in one single study and find out what democracy canâand cannotâbring.
Until recently, most scholars and policy makers have assumed the value of democracy , emphasizing, for example, the positive effects of democracy . This optimistic majority also likes to draw attention to the fact that democracy has triumphed worldwide, presenting these global waves as evidence that democracy is universally seen as a âgood thingâ. Undeniably, studies have shown that the democratic type of political system has become increasingly widespread (see also Chapter 2). Particularly, since 1989, waves of democratization have swept the world (Huntington 1991; Doorenspleet 2000; Schmitter and Treschel 2004; Merkel 2010). 5 In addition, scholars who defend democracy keep repeating thatâdespite recent economic uncertainties and political changesâmost people still strongly support the idea of democracy , all around the world. To be sure, studies have shown this worldwide support is still overwhelming and strong (Norris 1999a, b, 2011; Stoker 2006; Merkel 2010; Doorenspleet 2012; Wessels 2015; Inglehart 2016), 6 which reinforces this idea that democracy must have value as it is valued by most people.
Up till now, this rosy picture around the value of democracy has been quite mainstream and has not been challenged too much. Still, this overly optimistic story has been questioned indirectly by scholars who started to study the actual quality of democracy . This approach acknowledges that the future of democracy looks less hopeful and certain than before, due toâfor exampleâdecreasing levels of popular satisfaction with democracy (see, e.g., Norris 2011; Doorenspleet 2012). Gradually, more people are dissatisfied with the established political parties, representative institutions and minority rights; they are also more open to authoritarian interpretations of democracy (Foa and Mounk 2017). 7
These scholars have noticed that there are problems around the functioning of democracy in practice (Zakaria 2003; Diamond and Morlino 2005; Stoker 2006; Hay 2007; Flinders 2012) and try to understand and explain these problems in depth. Moreover, the prevailing way of looking at democracy itself, with the ongoing focus on elections, has recently been rigorously questioned. Although the words âdemocracy â and âelectionâ have almost become synonymous (see also Chapter 2), a growing group of scholars started to defend the notion that democracy is not just a system with free and fair elections (see also Chapter 7). Studies which convincingly reject the idea to reduce âdemocracy â to a set of procedures have received quite some attention in the popular media, leading to debates far beyond the academic world (see, i.e., Van Reybrouck 2016). 8
Although these critical voices challenge the bright side of (the study of) democracy , eventually thei...