American Democratization: The Solution to Incite All Problems
The world has recently experienced something unique to the era of globalization. American ideals, including its particularly recognizable version of democracy, are spreading extensively worldwide. The helping hands of globalization reach as far as Asia and the Middle East. Entire populations rally behind the progress of unity and respectability, as is displayed by the countless people shown on the news with signs of protest held high. Whether it’s in kickstarting a revolution or revamping a previously existing democracy, Western ideologies are welcomed universally.
Or are they? In actuality, modern democratization is a form of American cultural imperialism that undermines the very same principles it immediately appears to promote. Cultural imperialism is one of many pitfalls of globalization, and is defined by the inequality of power throughout cultures, and the overpowering of less recognized cultures by more influential ones. To clearly see how American democratization influences undemocratic regimes, we must first pose this question: “Is democratization a panacea or a problem for reform?” (Lim).
The answer is actually quite simple— Western political meddling discourages authoritarian governments from adopting a democratic system.
The American ideas about democracy have drastically evolved from traditional democratic standards. Adapting to a capitalized society, they empower competitive individuals and encourage economic participation: “[...]Washington politicians, to a large degree, are bought and packaged by Wall Street” (Barrett). While in America such norms are readily accepted, in other countries that’s not the case.
Where the Western world holds more capitalistic values, other parts of the world hold more religious or communal values. While manifestations of this mindset seem distant to us here in the United States, reality warrants a closer look at the statistics: In 2012, 51% of the world disliked American ideas about democracy, while 45% liked them (the other 6% either abstained from voting or were not surveyed) (General Globalization - Implications Of Globalization).
We must also consider the factor of religion and preexisting societal norms. Many cultures would oppose becoming heavily reliant on constant consumerism because their beliefs would prohibit it. In some cases, adopting democracy would be a blatant disregard of long-upheld traditions unique and precious to a community.
Respondents in predominantly Muslim nations in particular tend to give the U.S. unfavorable rankings for cultural appeal (General Globalization - Implications Of Globalization). This can be discerned as one of the reasons most democratic revolutions turn violent— American democratization is generally accompanied by international pressure for major ideological changes. By pushing for the acceptance of, say, controversial civil rights (such as gender equality) among populations in strong opposition to these rights, we may end up trying to do too much too quickly, therefore reducing the possibility of a stable democracy forming.
This brings about the notion that perhaps a country isn’t quite ready for the democracy we force upon them. Adversity within its borders, maybe unknown to Americanizing forces, can make it difficult to establish new governmental policies. These factors could include anything from financial struggles to borderline civil wars.
“An authoritarian government agrees to a global regime to gain benefits of one sort (usually economic) but is forced to accept the political consequences (greater popular pressure for democracy) that follow” (Dalpino). Due of the lure of those economic benefits, some nations can be either rushed into or financially bound to adopt a democratic system. In these cases it is common to end up with pseudo-democracies, or fraudulent regimes obscured by the pretense of a democratic system. True democracies take lots of time and effort to start and maintain.
The Arab Spring, especially the rebellion in Egypt, epitomizes the negative effects of American democratization. “Over and over again, in similar words and phrases, one Egyptian or another would say, ‘We love Americans, but we hate your politics.’” Signs of protest held up in the streets have featured lines such as “To U.S. policy makers: Get your dirty hands out of Egypt” (Barrett). Egypt is a prime example of a pseudo-democracy, as riots in the streets pressured the government to abandon its authoritarian practices upon bringing international attention to the situation.
The reasons for Egyptian opposition of our encroaching politics are fairly straightforward. The Americanized version of democracy strongly encourages class separation, providing a wider range of citizens’ economic circumstances for the government to have to appease. It perpetuates the rise of the wealthy into the positions of “elites,” all with the potential to abuse their power and corrupt the system.
Also, in assuming the position of a newcomer to the democratic world, Egypt would all but guarantee a significant discrepancy in influence between it and established world leaders. How is Egypt to have adequate control over political implementation if its input is not as heavily weighted?
The fact of the matter is, the whole world is not America. By forcing what works for us onto other nations, not only are we oppressing entire populations, but also discouraging cultural diversity across the globe.
We must learn to accept that there are different ways to go about bringing stability and peace to a country, and there will be times when those ways are far from democratic. “For every society in which a ‘people’s power’ revolution is helped along by international cheering squads and satellite television, another is daily becoming more cosmopolitan while adhering to traditional (and often authoritarian) practices” (Dalpino).
Not only does American democratization discourage cultural diversity, but it disrupts the natural progression of a people. This hinders not only the culture in question but also the development of the entire world, for if one nation’s ideals are always abided by, there is less likely to be experimentation of innovative political systems.
For all we know, the ultimatum of governmental ideologies is just waiting to be stumbled upon by a country in the process of revolutionizing its system. We will never find out if we don’t leave the rest of the world to assess its own options.
Works Cited:
"Arab Spring's Uprisings Reshape U.S. Influence." CBSNews. CBS Interactive, n.d. Web. 12 Feb. 2014. <http://www.cbsnews.com/news/arab-springs-uprisings-reshape-us-influence/>.
Barrett, Greg. "Americanized Democracy: Independence or Dependence?" The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, 04 July 2013. Web. 12 Feb. 2014. <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/greg-barrett/americanized-democracy-independence-or-dependence_b_3547070.html>.
Blight, Garry, Sheila Pulham, and Paul Torpey. "Arab Spring: An Interactive Timeline of Middle East Protests." Theguardian.com. Guardian News and Media, 05 Jan. 2012. Web. 12 Feb. 2014. <http://www.theguardian.com/world/interactive/2011/mar/22/middle-east-protest-interactive-timeline>.
Crockett, Sophie. "Has Globalization Spread Democracy around the World?" EInternational Relations. N.p., 27 Aug. 2011. Web. 12 Feb. 2014. <http://www.e-ir.info/2011/08/27/has-globalization-spread-democracy-around-the-world/>.
Dalpino, Catharin E. "Does Globalization Promote Democracy?: An Early Assessment." The Brookings Institution. N.p., n.d. Web. 12 Feb. 2014. <http://www.brookings.edu/research/articles/2001/09/fall-democracy-dalpino>.
"General Globalization - Implications Of Globalization." - Democracy, Economic, Cultural, and Countries. N.p., n.d. Web. 12 Feb. 2014. <http://science.jrank.org/pages/9546/General-Globalization-Implications-Globalization.html>.
"Global Opinion of Obama Slips, International Policies Faulted." Pew Global Attitudes Project RSS. N.p., 13 June 2012. Web. 12 Feb. 2014. <http://www.pewglobal.org/2012/06/13/chapter-2-attitudes-toward-american-culture-and-ideas/>.
Heine, Jorge. "Globalization and Democracy | OpenDemocracy." OpenDemocracy. N.p., 11 May 2011. Web. 12 Feb. 2014. <http://www.opendemocracy.net/jorge-heine/globalization-and-democracy>.
Lim, Haeran. "Democratization and the Transformation Process in East Asian Development States: Focus on Financial Reform in Korea and Taiwan." The Brookings Institution. N.p., Mar. 2009. Web. 12 Feb. 2014. <http://www.brookings.edu/research/papers/2009/03/democratization-transformation-lim>.
Or are they? In actuality, modern democratization is a form of American cultural imperialism that undermines the very same principles it immediately appears to promote. Cultural imperialism is one of many pitfalls of globalization, and is defined by the inequality of power throughout cultures, and the overpowering of less recognized cultures by more influential ones. To clearly see how American democratization influences undemocratic regimes, we must first pose this question: “Is democratization a panacea or a problem for reform?” (Lim).
The answer is actually quite simple— Western political meddling discourages authoritarian governments from adopting a democratic system.
The American ideas about democracy have drastically evolved from traditional democratic standards. Adapting to a capitalized society, they empower competitive individuals and encourage economic participation: “[...]Washington politicians, to a large degree, are bought and packaged by Wall Street” (Barrett). While in America such norms are readily accepted, in other countries that’s not the case.
Where the Western world holds more capitalistic values, other parts of the world hold more religious or communal values. While manifestations of this mindset seem distant to us here in the United States, reality warrants a closer look at the statistics: In 2012, 51% of the world disliked American ideas about democracy, while 45% liked them (the other 6% either abstained from voting or were not surveyed) (General Globalization - Implications Of Globalization).
We must also consider the factor of religion and preexisting societal norms. Many cultures would oppose becoming heavily reliant on constant consumerism because their beliefs would prohibit it. In some cases, adopting democracy would be a blatant disregard of long-upheld traditions unique and precious to a community.
Respondents in predominantly Muslim nations in particular tend to give the U.S. unfavorable rankings for cultural appeal (General Globalization - Implications Of Globalization). This can be discerned as one of the reasons most democratic revolutions turn violent— American democratization is generally accompanied by international pressure for major ideological changes. By pushing for the acceptance of, say, controversial civil rights (such as gender equality) among populations in strong opposition to these rights, we may end up trying to do too much too quickly, therefore reducing the possibility of a stable democracy forming.
This brings about the notion that perhaps a country isn’t quite ready for the democracy we force upon them. Adversity within its borders, maybe unknown to Americanizing forces, can make it difficult to establish new governmental policies. These factors could include anything from financial struggles to borderline civil wars.
“An authoritarian government agrees to a global regime to gain benefits of one sort (usually economic) but is forced to accept the political consequences (greater popular pressure for democracy) that follow” (Dalpino). Due of the lure of those economic benefits, some nations can be either rushed into or financially bound to adopt a democratic system. In these cases it is common to end up with pseudo-democracies, or fraudulent regimes obscured by the pretense of a democratic system. True democracies take lots of time and effort to start and maintain.
The Arab Spring, especially the rebellion in Egypt, epitomizes the negative effects of American democratization. “Over and over again, in similar words and phrases, one Egyptian or another would say, ‘We love Americans, but we hate your politics.’” Signs of protest held up in the streets have featured lines such as “To U.S. policy makers: Get your dirty hands out of Egypt” (Barrett). Egypt is a prime example of a pseudo-democracy, as riots in the streets pressured the government to abandon its authoritarian practices upon bringing international attention to the situation.
The reasons for Egyptian opposition of our encroaching politics are fairly straightforward. The Americanized version of democracy strongly encourages class separation, providing a wider range of citizens’ economic circumstances for the government to have to appease. It perpetuates the rise of the wealthy into the positions of “elites,” all with the potential to abuse their power and corrupt the system.
Also, in assuming the position of a newcomer to the democratic world, Egypt would all but guarantee a significant discrepancy in influence between it and established world leaders. How is Egypt to have adequate control over political implementation if its input is not as heavily weighted?
The fact of the matter is, the whole world is not America. By forcing what works for us onto other nations, not only are we oppressing entire populations, but also discouraging cultural diversity across the globe.
We must learn to accept that there are different ways to go about bringing stability and peace to a country, and there will be times when those ways are far from democratic. “For every society in which a ‘people’s power’ revolution is helped along by international cheering squads and satellite television, another is daily becoming more cosmopolitan while adhering to traditional (and often authoritarian) practices” (Dalpino).
Not only does American democratization discourage cultural diversity, but it disrupts the natural progression of a people. This hinders not only the culture in question but also the development of the entire world, for if one nation’s ideals are always abided by, there is less likely to be experimentation of innovative political systems.
For all we know, the ultimatum of governmental ideologies is just waiting to be stumbled upon by a country in the process of revolutionizing its system. We will never find out if we don’t leave the rest of the world to assess its own options.
Works Cited:
"Arab Spring's Uprisings Reshape U.S. Influence." CBSNews. CBS Interactive, n.d. Web. 12 Feb. 2014. <http://www.cbsnews.com/news/arab-springs-uprisings-reshape-us-influence/>.
Barrett, Greg. "Americanized Democracy: Independence or Dependence?" The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, 04 July 2013. Web. 12 Feb. 2014. <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/greg-barrett/americanized-democracy-independence-or-dependence_b_3547070.html>.
Blight, Garry, Sheila Pulham, and Paul Torpey. "Arab Spring: An Interactive Timeline of Middle East Protests." Theguardian.com. Guardian News and Media, 05 Jan. 2012. Web. 12 Feb. 2014. <http://www.theguardian.com/world/interactive/2011/mar/22/middle-east-protest-interactive-timeline>.
Crockett, Sophie. "Has Globalization Spread Democracy around the World?" EInternational Relations. N.p., 27 Aug. 2011. Web. 12 Feb. 2014. <http://www.e-ir.info/2011/08/27/has-globalization-spread-democracy-around-the-world/>.
Dalpino, Catharin E. "Does Globalization Promote Democracy?: An Early Assessment." The Brookings Institution. N.p., n.d. Web. 12 Feb. 2014. <http://www.brookings.edu/research/articles/2001/09/fall-democracy-dalpino>.
"General Globalization - Implications Of Globalization." - Democracy, Economic, Cultural, and Countries. N.p., n.d. Web. 12 Feb. 2014. <http://science.jrank.org/pages/9546/General-Globalization-Implications-Globalization.html>.
"Global Opinion of Obama Slips, International Policies Faulted." Pew Global Attitudes Project RSS. N.p., 13 June 2012. Web. 12 Feb. 2014. <http://www.pewglobal.org/2012/06/13/chapter-2-attitudes-toward-american-culture-and-ideas/>.
Heine, Jorge. "Globalization and Democracy | OpenDemocracy." OpenDemocracy. N.p., 11 May 2011. Web. 12 Feb. 2014. <http://www.opendemocracy.net/jorge-heine/globalization-and-democracy>.
Lim, Haeran. "Democratization and the Transformation Process in East Asian Development States: Focus on Financial Reform in Korea and Taiwan." The Brookings Institution. N.p., Mar. 2009. Web. 12 Feb. 2014. <http://www.brookings.edu/research/papers/2009/03/democratization-transformation-lim>.