America as a Democratic Model:
Promoting or Preventing Democratic Transition?
By B.E.N.

What’s the best democracy? A relevant question focused on what model should be followed when promoting this form of governance to states foreign to the practice. It begs to question who the best democracy really is. Who has the most to offer as an example to the fledgling state? For those engaged in the process of building states, it seeks a model for success. But what it does not do, this simple question, is ask what is feasible for democratic development.

As the sole superpower, unrivaled militarily and envied economically, the United States is a unique paradigm of democracy. As the oldest example of this form of government today, many assume that this model is the best one, again begging the question of feasibility. Is it feasible to apply the principles of democracy and capitalism as practiced by the US to nation-building projects in the developing world? The answer to this is an obvious and definitive no. Why?

Before we can properly answer this question, we must first examine what democracy is, more specifically that of democratic change. Dr. Mohammed Nimer, the research director for the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), states that, “democratic change implies that members of any collectivity agree on the management of existing conflicts.” He continues, “the absence of such condition means society will eventually break-up or be held together artificially by some coercive power.”[1] So there must exist, first and foremost, a general desire for collective management within a society for democracy to take root.

Dr. Francis Fukuyama, who speaks to it as democratic transition, continues this line of thought. For this process of democratic transition to occur, Fukuyama points to four conditions: one is the level of development, the second is culture, thirdly is the geo-political “neighborhood”, and finally domestic ideas.[2]

While it is the fourth condition put forward, it echoes that of Nimer in the importance of societal acceptance of collective rule. He simply, and quite aptly puts it, “you cannot have democracy unless you have people who believe in democracy.”[3]

But do Americans believe in democracy? Just 64% of eligible US voters cast ballots in 2004, and this was up from 60% in 2000.[4] Voter turnout in US elections is relatively low compared to elections held in other Western states. Even developing democracies typically show a much higher turn out than the US musters. Iraq’s parliamentary elections, under fear of death from the various insurgent groups, managed a voter turnout of 79.6%[5], over 20% higher than the US. If a developing state, in the process of transitioning to democracy, only turned out 60% or 64% in its elections, the legitimacy and success of said elections would be mixed at best. So the practice of democracy, at least by US standards, requires a much higher benchmark than even the US can meet.

While the idea of democracy could arguably be the single most important element to democratic development, Fukuyama also examines the importance of enablers to democratic transition. For instance, he points to a correlation between per capita GDP and its proportionality to democracy, highlighting that, “virtually all of the industrialized countries are functioning democracies, and relatively few poor countries are democratic.”[6] While valid exceptions do exist, most notably India and Saudi Arabia as representatives of the ends of the spectrum, this is a pretty valid point, which examines the ability of an emerging democratic state to sustain its democratic development. “If you live in a subsistence economy you worry about feeding your family and not whether you can vote,” Fukuyama points out, continuing, “and all of those things begin changing as you become richer.”[7] He even goes so far as to assign a value of $6,000 per capita GDP to this condition as the typical benchmark required for democratic transition to occur.

Per the CIA World Factbook, the US per capita GDP is $41,800. Per the same source, the per capita GDP of the world is only $9,300 and the European Union amounts to $28,100. So the individual purchasing power of one average American is equal to two average Europeans or 52.25 typical Congolese.[8] Comparatively speaking, it is difficult for Americans, use to so much, to identify with the struggles of people in the developing world who are use to so little. It is this economic disparity that also translates into the intolerance Americans hold for corruption; something rather common and somewhat tolerated through most of the developing world. So the American practice of throwing money, and occasionally a solution, at a problem is simply not feasible for states transitioning towards democracy.

Fukuyama mentions, as his third condition, the importance of the neighborhood. All states are influenced, and sometimes coerced towards certain predetermined outcomes beneficial to their more powerful neighbors. But sometimes it is not strength or arms as it is simple peer pressure that influences state actions. Democracy, as it is typically understood as a form of government, is a Western concept. In certain locals, especially the Middle East, Western concepts are foreign concepts and anything foreign is not accepted as a good concept. It is necessary to translate democracy into something acceptable to the Transitioning State as it furthers its democratic development.

If the US is considered anything, it is certainly Western. It is the quintessential icon of the Western world. Therefore it is impossible to package US democracy as anything other than just that- US democracy. Without an ability to literally translate US democracy into something less, Western, it will hold more the image of Western encroachment rather than that of democratic enlightenment.

This fits into the larger concept of culture and Fukuyama’s final condition. Culture has become more and more a hot topic in the developing world, especially with their impression that they are losing their culture to Western influence. This includes the notion of religion and couldn’t be more apparent than the struggle some are having with the compatibility of Islam with democracy. This struggle has been manipulated by some as avenues for exploiting the cultural dilemma transitioning states are facing.

For example, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi used the fundamentalist interpretation of the Quran put forth by his religious mentor, Abu Muhammad al-Maqdisi. Per both Maqdisi and Zarqawi, democracy is heresy as it promotes the decision of the people over that of God as laid out in the Quran. The logical progression used by both is simple in its self-fulfilling nature and extremely dangerous when presented to illiterate and ignorant Muslims who depend on the wisdom and intentions of their religious leaders to show them the pitfalls in fundamentalist teachings.

But more than religion alone, it is the all-encompassing notion of culture as a whole that constitutes the concern of developing states transitioning to democracy. US culture revolves around the notion of capitalism with market drivers and competition fueling the notion and necessity for individuals to sell themselves to others and themselves. Americans celebrate their individualism with the notion of a pioneering spirit conquering life’s obstacles. Compare this with the collective mentality that permeates the vast majority of the globe, highlighted in their focus on protecting and nurturing individual family ties and societal norms in general and the alien nature of US culture stands out.

It is the practices of US democracy that make America so unique and inherently a very poor model for states transitioning to a democratic form of government. But it is not American culture alone that impedes the promotion of democracy. As stated throughout this piece, several conditions are necessary for democracy to not only take root but find nourishment for continued growth. It takes an economic base that supports a growing middle class to sustain and fuel democracy. It takes a political will within the population to take control of their state and guide it in the direction they see fit. It takes a cultural acceptance of tolerance and patience in dealing with others within the state to foment collective management of their existing conflicts. It is this admixture of economic, political and cultural factors that provide impediments to the transitioning of a state to democracy.

[1] Nimer, Mohammad. “Prospects for an American Muslim Polity: Implicat5ions for Muslim World Democratization”. CSID 6th Annual Conference, Washington D.C. April 22-23, 2005. 25 Feb 06. http://www.islam-democracy.org/documents/pdf/6th_Annual_Conference-MohamedNimer.pdf.

[2] Fukuyama, Francis. “Do we really know how to promote democracy?” Remarks made to the New York Democracy Forum on May 24, 2005. 25 Feb 06. http://www.ned.org/nydf/francisFukuyama05.pdf.
[3] Ibid.
[4] US Census Bureau News Release. http://www.census.gov/Press-Release/www/releases/archives/voting/004986.html.
[5] Iraqi Elections. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraqi_legislative_election,_December_2005.
[6] Fukuyama, Francis. “Do we really know how to promote democracy?” Remarks made to the New York Democracy Forum on May 24, 2005. 25 Feb 06. http://www.ned.org/nydf/francisFukuyama05.pdf.
[7] Ibid.
[8] CIA World Factbook. http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/us.html.