Chapter Notes

How do we assess democracy's outcomes?

When we compare democracy to other forms of government like dictatorships or monarchies, it often comes out on top. This is because we believe democracy is better for several reasons. It:

• Promotes equality among citizens
• Enhances the dignity of the individual
• Improves the quality of decision-making
• Provides a method to resolve conflicts
• Allows room to correct mistakes

However, this leads to a common dilemma. While most people support the idea of democracy, they are often not satisfied with how it works in their country.

It's important to remember that democracy is just a form of government. It can create the right conditions for achieving goals, but it doesn't guarantee them. The citizens must take advantage of these conditions to bring about positive change.

Accountable, responsive and legitimate government

There are certain core outcomes we must expect from any democracy. The most basic is that it should produce a government that is accountable to the citizens and responsive to their needs and expectations. An accountable government is one that answers to the people, while a responsive government acts on what the people want.

Efficiency vs. Effectiveness

Some people argue that non-democratic governments are more efficient because they can make and implement decisions very quickly, without worrying about public opinion or debates.

• Democracy is based on deliberation and negotiation, which naturally takes more time.
• However, this delay is often worth it. A democratic government follows procedures, which means its decisions are more likely to be accepted by the people and, therefore, more effective in the long run.

Transparency in Government

A key feature of democracy is transparency. This means that citizens have the right and the means to examine the process of decision-making. They can find out if a decision was made following the correct rules and procedures. This is often missing in non-democratic governments.

To measure this, we can look for:

• Regular, free, and fair elections
• Open public debate on major policies
• Citizens' right to information about the government

In reality, democracies have a mixed record. They are generally successful at holding regular elections and allowing public debate. However, they often fall short in providing a truly fair chance to every candidate and in sharing information freely with citizens.

Responsiveness and Corruption

In terms of being responsive to people's needs and being free of corruption, the record of democracies is not impressive. They often ignore the demands of a majority of the population and struggle with corruption. However, there is no evidence to suggest that non-democratic regimes are less corrupt or more sensitive to the people.

Legitimate Government

Despite its flaws, a democratic government has one clear advantage: it is a legitimate government. It may be slow and sometimes inefficient or unresponsive, but it is the people's own government. People choose their rulers, which is why there is overwhelming support for the idea of democracy across the world, even in countries that are not fully democratic.

Economic growth and development

It seems fair to expect that a good government should also produce economic development. However, the evidence on this is mixed.

• Studies from 1950 to 2000 show that, on average, dictatorships have had a slightly higher rate of economic growth than democracies.
• This can be worrying, but it's not a reason to reject democracy. Economic development depends on many factors, including a country's population size, its global situation, and its economic priorities.
• Crucially, when we look only at poor countries, the difference in growth rates between democracies and dictatorships is negligible.

We cannot say that democracy is a guarantee of economic development, but we can expect it not to fall behind dictatorships in this respect. Given democracy's other positive outcomes, it remains the better choice.

Reduction of inequality and poverty

Beyond just growth, we might expect democracies to reduce economic inequality and poverty. Since democracy is based on the principle of political equality (one person, one vote), it seems logical that it should also lead to a more just distribution of wealth.

However, in reality, democracies have not been very successful at this.

• We often see growing economic inequalities, where a small number of ultra-rich individuals control a massive share of the country's wealth and income.
• Meanwhile, those at the bottom of society have very little, and their incomes have sometimes declined, making it hard to afford basic needs like food, housing, and education.
• Even though the poor make up a large portion of voters, democratically elected governments often do not seem to address the problem of poverty with the urgency one might expect.

Dignity and freedom of the citizens

Where democracy truly excels is in promoting the dignity and freedom of the individual. The passion for respect and freedom is the very foundation of democracy.

• Dignity of Women: Historically, most societies were male-dominated. Long struggles by women have led to democracies recognizing the principle of respect and equal treatment. While this doesn't mean women are always treated with respect in practice, the fact that the principle is legally and morally recognized makes it easier for women to fight against discrimination.
• Caste Inequalities: In India, democracy has strengthened the claims of disadvantaged and discriminated castes for equal status and opportunity. Though caste-based atrocities still occur, they lack moral and legal foundations in a democratic system.

A unique feature of democracy is that its examination never ends. As people get some benefits, they begin to ask for more and want to make their democracy even better. The fact that people can complain and hold expectations is a sign of democracy's success. It shows that people have moved from being powerless subjects to being aware citizens.