Non-Democratic Regimes for Transition - Assignment Example

Non-Democratic Regimes for Transition Introduction During the end of the cold war, Francis Fukuyama argued that the liberal democracy was the end form of a viable political institution for the human race. However, during the time most countries were becoming liberal democratic between the periods of 1990. The period between 1980 and 1990 was considered as the third wave for democratization as many countries turned to be democrats. During the period, many countries were optimistic on the nature of the unfolding state of the democratic revolution. However, a decade after the democratic revolution the optimism faded away and nearly a hundred countries that had become democrats suffered a breakdown and transited back to become democrats. In other countries, the transition to democracy stuck and the countries reversed from becoming democrats to non-democratic countries. However, this transition and the latest setback are only temporary. It is important to consider why democracy transition countries are in trouble as well as the conditions under which democracies can function and survive best to transit become to the democratic states. Conditions required for non-democratic regimes for transition Democratization can occur anywhere even the mostly unexpected countries thus it is important to note though consolidation and stable democracies are hard to achieve due to ineffective governments in the associated countries. The answer to the argument that is raised above will point to essential areas needed in ensuring that the development ought to be successful. These can be described as the conditions for venturing in to a stable democracy and ensuring that the development is a success. This condition includes the countries having a relative high and stable level of the economy, having a vibrant civil society and a strong civic authority. For the non-democratic country to have a smooth transition, it is necessary for them to have a strong civil authority as well as a firm level of the economy. These necessary conditions are characterized by the old and stable democracies that have stable democracies (Juan J Linz and Stepan, 269). However, they remain not the only things that are lacking in the most of transitioning and third wave countries. Rather, another the attributes that these states are lacking is the provision of a coherent and stable functioning state. Democratization in a country is likely to become a success when the new state regime is distinguished from the former regime. In these types of countries, they have regimes where superior people rule the country and there is no difference and distinction between the state and the regime. Apparently, when the state to democratization begins, the state apparatus are likely going to collapse because of influence of the old regime. The resultant results are a stateless nation that itself has made the transition very difficult to achieve and extremely possible. It is necessary for such kinds of countries to make distinctions and mark boundaries between regimes are an important consideration for the development to becoming democrats (Levitsky and Way, par 3). The transitioning countries need to achieve a stable state that can be achieved through a stable economy. It the period of development will become very disruptive then it becomes difficult in the attainment of a stable democracy. There is a state of calmness characterized by non-distractions is an essential condition to allow development. In non-democratic countries, conflicts about the authority and the domain of policies because of the identities and loyalties of the non-democrats are so intense that states seize their existence. For the state to achieve democratic consolidation, incumbent transitions are preferred as compared to opposition-initiated types of democracy. This involves democracy that has been started by individuals of the country. Such type of democracy will be easy to achieve and will lead to the attainment of a stable state for the country. As a major condition for the transition, orderly and peaceful transitions ought to be considered as opposed to the opposition started types of transition. Orderly and peaceful transitions among the involved states are likely to be more successful as compared to transitions preceded by ethnic and revolutionary wars and riots (Krastev, 506). A state of calmness and peace help the country to remain intact during the process of development and it helps the new regime to consolidate the state of the nation to achieve cohesion and institutional hierarchy that is difficult to achieve under the new regime. The transitioning countries need to develop a state of cohesion. The more divided a country will become then the more difficulty in attainment of a consolidated democracy. It becomes very difficult for individuals in a multicultural society to become members of one community. However, this is an essential condition required for the development. Individuals of the country need to consider the value of becoming democratic thus have a common goal to achieve (Juan J Linz and Stepan, 278). When a larger portion in a state do not consider the value of the growing democratic upon which the state is founded then it becomes very difficult to construct norms and practices of democracy in the country. It is, therefore, very necessary for the individuals to realize the value of becoming a democratic state and join to one community. However, when this is achieved, nurturing natural identity then becomes very easy to divert the tremendous amount of energy and resources needed for the development. Important conditions for the completion of the development among the countries is allowing individuals in the countries to hold free and contested elections if yet they change to become non-democrats is temporary. Elections ought to be conducted on the basis of inclusive voter eligibility so as to meet the institutional requirements. Governments, as well as authorities, in the countries develop the authority to determine policies in the country and its powers ought not to be constrained by interlocking set of reserve domains such as authoritarian enclave’s for the transition to be possible (Krastev, 503). Conclusion According to Fukuyama argument, the transition to democracy stuck in some countries while, in other countries, they reversed from becoming democrats to non-democratic countries. However, this development and the latest setback are only temporary. There are conditions that are necessary to ensure the development. It is necessary for the involved countries to building nation-state institutions if none existed before as well as strengthen the state capabilities where they are weak to ensure that transition. Without an effective state then it becomes very difficult in achieving a stable democracy. It is important to have a relative high and stable level of the economy in the country, having a vibrant civil society and a strong civic authority to achieve democracy in the country. The countries ought to ensure that they attain a stable state, develop a state of cohesion and become a united community. Work citied Krastev, Ivan. “Paradoxes of the New Authoritarianism.” Journal of Democracy 2011 : 502–509. Levitsky, Steven, and Lucan Way. “The Rise of Competitive Authoritarianism.” Journal of Democracy 2002 : 303–313. Linz, Juan J, and Alfred Stepan. The Breakdown of Democratic Regimes, Latin America. Vol. 60. N. p., 1978. Linz, Juan J., and Alfred Stepan. “Problems of Democratic Transition and Consolidation: Southern Europe, South America, and Post-Communist Europe.” Problems of Democratic Transition and Consolidation: Southern Europe, South America, and Post-Communist Europe. N. p., 1996. 267–278.  Read More