Democracy - Stable or Destructive? - EBP 2 (300305606)

 Inequality and regime change : Democratic transitions and the stability of Democratic Rule (Stephen Haggard , Robert R. Kaufman) 

Conflict : does it encourage democratic growth and transition?

Haggard and Kaufman ask what essentially must be a question on all minds. Does inequality, instability and conflicts drive a regime towards a liberal and "modern" system , rather than staying in a archaic and stale state? Idealistically , we would say yes - example being the Arab Spring. Realistically , although it may change society for the better, in a sense , it must be nurtured constantly . Society also must be willing to accept/have knowledge this new form of rule and changes it entails. Otherwise democracy , dependent on circumstance, is a potentially null and void concept .

Although conflict does encourage change and transition, in the after math , it is important to have a system (or people) of sorts , which can act as a guiding system  ,and indicate "how things work'.

Factors to consider. 

What will be discussed is  factors , which are important to further understanding of this question. A factor  to consider, is of course inequality. Naively , it is to be believed that all regimes are "equal" , which is not the case. Economic and social gaps created by inequality creates fear on both sides (being citizen and political) . Disadvantage/inequality creates potential for open competition in politics - creating a problem. Elitist societies, fear the change to democracy because of the outcome. - loss of power and control to what they believe to be to "a rabble".

Inequality increases demand for change and redistribution from the lower classes to the elite.  As previously stated , (and which Haggard and Kaufman re-enforce throughout this article) loss of power is concerning. For the elite , they lose everything , whilst the lower class gain everything.

Although a  dated example - The French Revolution (1789-1999) can applied to this theory. The monarchy created a collective upheaval for the French people, politically, socially and economically.  Despite still being one of of the historical events still being debated today , the general consensus is that 

• A- Poor economy - people were overtime, being starved of the basic, while the bourgeoisie classes and aristocracy/monarchy isolated themselves. Inefficient tax systems also were another problem. 
  B-  Inefficient leadership - King Louis XVI , despite being an absolute monarch - was . to put it bluntly an ineffective ruler - (due to isolation of Royal French Court in Versailles which was again imposed by the King.) 
  
  
  C- Resulting from the isolation , the French Monarchy indifference gave way and opportunity to French Parliament and the French people to refute reforms imposed by the King. 
  
  
  This shows , that inequality does trigger regime change , and that democratic rule is a effective means of ruling (maintain power) .
  
  Although the benefits of democratic rule are beneficial , as is said with the French Revolution , it is all dependent on circumstances, influences , who ever is in power and so on.
  
  
  North Korea is a country which is in poor shape , politically and economically.  The Kim Dynasty have consolidated power over society - creating a hazardous and isolated state. The consolidation of power is abused, and minor or major threats to the regime, The complete  and total control over society  in the North Korean state makes outsider intervention and democracy virtually impossible. This also creates a issue - that democracy , if applied , would be a failure , and could potentially do more harm than good. The basis of democratic change are there (being inequality , conflict and so on.) , but considering the outcome , that being the regime  has the complete power to (which Haggard and Kaufman state) crush opposition and ultimately destroying the core of the state. 
  
  
  
  
  DEMOCRACY - FOR BETTER OR WORSE?
  
  All in all , even with the given benefits of a democratic regime , it thoroughly depends on circumstance, factors and the power/hold regimes have over the population. As with the case in North Korea, although the roots for democratic change are there, the fact that power and control is rife, it can not , as much as we would like , happen. If it did , how could it be predicted that it will last , let alone actually work , considering what is already known and the history.
  
  
  CONCLUSION 
  
  Although the model of democracy is good, the benefits it entails and a whole other collection of factors - the reality is - like any other regime , it has strengths and weakness. Democracy , if forcefully applied or thrust upon a regime in a swift moment of change could potentially make a regime return to its origins , despite being liberated. (The idea of comfort over practicality).