ABSTRACT
For a long time in comparative politics, the ‘to be or not to be’ of democracy was held to be dependent mainly on social and economic conditions. According to one school of thought, economic development is the basic prerequisite of democracy. In the 1950s and 1960s, researchers such as Daniel Lerner, Seymour Lipset and Philips Cutright presented evidence pointing to a strong statistical relationship between the level of economic growth and various measures of democracy. These data furnished powerful support for a theory of modernisation. According to this theory, changes in economic life provide the basis for democratic government. Through concomitant processes of industrialisation and urbanisation, together with improvements in the areas of communication and education, a social transformation in society takes place. In effect, ordinary citizens – who had been easily excluded before – acquire political resources and develop democratic attitudes, and so become able to take active part in the political process. This is a theory, in other words, of political emancipation at the mass societal level. And the driving factor behind the process is economic development.1 Democratic potential can accordingly be measured in per capita GNP and related indicators. In poor and underdeveloped countries, therefore, the prospects for democracy are bleak. Democratic hopes stand little chance of fulfilment until profound changes have taken place in the social and economic realms. According to this analysis, then, the room for political manoeuvre is very limited. If an economic ‘take-off ’ has not yet been accomplished, efforts must be concentrated on that task. In the meantime, the democratic project must be put on the waiting list.
