Global Democracy. Promises and Delusions

Chapter

Abstract

The downfall of East European communism triggered hopes of a third, global wave of democracy. Driven by the spread of free markets and new information technologies, liberal democracy appeared as the only game in town. Closer inspection on the interplay of globalisation and democracy during the last two decades advises more caution. First, the globalisation of democracy can mean different, not necessarily complementary things: a rising number of states on the transition to democracy; the rise of post-national institutions with the European Union as a paradigm; or the democratisation of international organizations as a step towards a cosmopolitan democracy. Second, it is not at all evident that the globalisation of capital underpins the spread of democracy. Setbacks are not only to be observed in several ‘new democracies’, notably in the post-Soviet area. Also in the West, market-conformism has subverted the meaning of democracy, while the global financial crisis exacerbated the EU’s democratic deficit. Given these conditions, cosmopolitan democracy seems a more distant hope.

Keywords

Civil Society International Monetary Fund Global Civil Society Bretton Wood System Constitutional Treaty 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Bibliography

  1. Annan, K. 2000. We, the peoples. The role of the United Nations in the 21st century. New York: United Nations.Google Scholar
  2. Baker, P. 2006. The realities of exporting democracy. Washington Post, January 25: A01.Google Scholar
  3. Bartels, L. 2010. Unequal democracy: The political economy of the new gilded age. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Beaud, O., et al. (eds.). 2004. L’Europe en voie de Constitution. Bruxelles: Bruylant.Google Scholar
  5. Brasch, W.M. 2005. America’s unpatriotic acts. The federal government’s violation of constitutional and civil rights. New York: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  6. Carothers, Th. 2002. The end of the transition paradigm. Journal of Democracy 13(1): 5–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Carothers, Th. 2003. Promoting democracy and fighting terror. Foreign Affairs 82(1): 84–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Carothers, Th. 2004. Democracy’s sobering state. Current History 103: 412–416.Google Scholar
  9. Carothers, Th. 2011. Think again. Arab democracy. Foreign Policy, March 10.Google Scholar
  10. Chua, A. 2003. World on fire. How exporting free market democracy breeds ethnic hatred and global instability. New York: Double Day.Google Scholar
  11. Collier, D., and S. Levitsky. 1997. Democracy with adjectives: Conceptual innovation in comparative research. World Politics 49(3): 430–451.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Crouch, C. 2004. Post-democracy. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  13. Dahl, R.A. 1989. Democracy and its critics. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Dahl, R.A. 2000. Can international organizations be democratic? A sceptics view. In Democracy’s edges, ed. I. Shapiro and C. Hacker Cordón, 19–36. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Dahrendorf, R. 2003. Making sense of the EU. The challenge for democracy. Journal of Democracy 14(4): 110–114.Google Scholar
  16. Dahrendorf, R. 2007. The crisis of democracy. London: Gibson Square Books.Google Scholar
  17. Diamond, L. 1996. Is the third wave over? Journal of Democracy 7(3): 20–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Diamond, L. 2002. Elections without democracy. Thinking about hybrid regimes. Journal of Democracy 13(2): 21–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Diamond, L. 2003. Can the whole world become democratic? Paper delivered at the Center for the Study of Democracy, University of California, Irvine.Google Scholar
  20. Diamond, L. 2004. Was Iraq a fool’s errant? Reply to Tony Smith. Foreign Affairs 83(6): 131–133.Google Scholar
  21. Dicken, P. 2007. Global shift. Mapping the changing contours of the world economy. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  22. Dollar, D., and A. Kraay. 2002. Spreading the wealth. Foreign Affairs 81(1): 120–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Economist Intelligence Unit. 2010. Democracy index 2010. Democracy in retreat. London: Economist Intelligence Unit.Google Scholar
  24. Firebaugh, Glenn. 2003. The new geography of global income inequality. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  25. Freedom House. 2012. Freedom in the world 2012. Washington, DC: Freedom House.Google Scholar
  26. Giddens, A. 1985. The nation-state and violence. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  27. Giddens, A. 2000. The third way and it critics. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  28. Giddens, A. 2003. Runaway world. How globalization is reshaping our life. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  29. Guilhot, N. 2005. The democracy makers. Human rights and the politics of global order. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  30. Habermas, J. 2001. The postnational constellation. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  31. Habermas, J. 2009. Europe. The faltering project. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  32. Habermas, J. 2012. The Crisis of the European Union. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  33. Held, D. 1995. Democracy and the global order. From modern state to cosmopolitical governance. Oxford: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  34. Held, D. 2010. Cosmopolitanism. Ideals and realities. Oxford: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  35. Held, D., et al. 1999. Global transformations. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  36. Held, D., and A. McGrew (eds.). 2000. The global transformations reader. 1st Ed. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  37. Hellman, J., and D. Kaufmann. 2001. Confronting the challenge of state capture in transition economies. Finance and Development 38(3): 31–35.Google Scholar
  38. Huntington, S.P. 1991. The third wave. Democratization in the late 20th century. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.Google Scholar
  39. James, H. 2001. The end of globalization: Lessons from the great depression. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  40. Johnson, S. 2009. The quiet coup. The Atlantic, May.Google Scholar
  41. Karatnycky, A. 2000. A century of progress. Journal of Democracy 11(1): 187–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Karl, T.L. 2003. The vicious cycle of inequality in Latin America. In What justice? Whose justice? Fighting for fairness in Latin America, ed. S.E. Eckstein and T.P. Wickham-Crowley. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  43. Korpi, W., and J. Palme. 2003. New politics and class politics in the context of austerity and globalisation. Welfare state regress in 18 countries 1975–95. American Political Science Review 97(3): 425–446.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Linz, J., and A. Stepan. 1997. Problems of democratic transition and consolidation. Southern Europe, South America, and post-communist Europe. Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  45. Lipset, S.M. 1994. The social requisites of democracy revisited. American Sociological Review 59(1): 1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Lipset, S.M., and J.M. Lakin. 2004. The democratic century. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.Google Scholar
  47. Marshall, T.H. 1949. Citizenship and social class (1973). In Citizenship and social class and other essays. Westport: Greenwood Press.Google Scholar
  48. McFaul, M. 2002. The fourth wave of democracy and dictatorship. Noncooperative transition in the postcommunist world. World Politics 54(January): 212–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Milanovic, B. 2005. Worlds apart. Measuring international and global inequality. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  50. Milanovich, B. 2011. The haves and the have-nots: A brief and idiosyncratic history of global inequality. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  51. Müller, K. 2012. Regional varieties of global inequalities. Reclaiming space for public policies. In Global trends and regional developments, ed. N. Genov. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  52. Münchau, W. 2012. Greece must default if it wants democracy. Financial Times, February 19.Google Scholar
  53. Murphy, C. 2001. Political consequences of the new inequality. International Studies Quarterly 45: 347–356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Nohlen, D. 2002. Political participation in new and old democracies. In Voter turnout since 1945. A global report, ed. Rafael López Pintor and Maria Gratschew. Stockholm: IDEA.Google Scholar
  55. Pacek, A., et al. 2009. Disenchanted or discerning: Voter turnout in post-communist countries. The Journal of Politics 71(2): 473–491.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Reinhart, C., and K. Rogoff. 2009. This time is different. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  57. Rodrick, D. 2011. The globalization paradox. Why global markets, states, and democracy can’t coexist. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  58. Roelofs, J. 2003. Foundations and public policy. The mask of pluralism. New York: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
  59. Roller, E. 2005. The performance of democracies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Sartori, G. 1991. Rethinking democracy: Bad polity and bad politics. International Social Science Journal 129: 437–450.Google Scholar
  61. Schmitter, Ph. 2003. Democracy in Europe and Europe’s democratization. Journal of Democracy 14(4): 71–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Uslaner, E., and M. Brown. 2005. Inequality, trust, and civic engagement. American Political Research 33(6): 868–894.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Whitman, J. 2002. Global governance as the friendly face of unaccountable power. Security Dialogue 33(1): 45–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. World Bank. 2002. Globalization, growth, and poverty. Building an inclusive world economy. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. World Bank. 2005. Equity and development. World development report 2006. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.AGH University of Science and TechnologyKrakówPoland
  2. 2.Faculty of Humanities, Department of Political Science and Contemporary HistoryFreie UniversitätBerlinGermany

Personalised recommendations