ABSTRACT
The SSRC scholars had empirical evidence to back up their thesis. Third World nations, by and large, came to be ruled by despots and tyrants. In Latin America, in Asia, in Africa and in the Middle East, democracy took a back seat as unrepresentative rulers unleashed autocratic or totalitarian mayhem on their citizens. The signs were discouraging. It appeared as though democracy was doomed. Members of the SSRC and others in the West's academies began to publish dispassionate tracts trying to understand why the Third World was so resistant to the idea of democracy. They studied the role therein of the armed forces, the bureaucracy, the educational systems, the communications networks, the political culture and other features. They scrutinized every aspect of Third World countries and concluded they were simply not equipped to support democracy. Accepting this conclusion, social scientists struck
out in other directions studying political development and social change in the Third World with no reference to democracy.
