Details — Outcomes of Democracy

Book: Democratic Politics II (Class 10)
Chapter: 5 — Outcomes of Democracy

1. How to Assess Democracy’s Outcomes

From Class IX discussion, democracy is better than dictatorship because it:

Promotes equality among citizens
Enhances dignity of the individual
Improves quality of decision-making
Provides a method to resolve conflicts
Allows room to correct mistakes

Dilemma: Most people support democracy vs monarchy/military/religious rule, but many are dissatisfied with democracy in practice — good in principle, not so good in practice. Are reasons only moral, or also prudential?

Over a hundred countries claim democratic politics (constitutions, elections, parties, rights) but differ in social situations, economic achievements, cultures—so outcomes differ. Still, ask what every democracy can be expected to provide because it is democracy.

Key caution: Democracy cannot address all socio-economic and political problems. It is just a form of government. It creates conditions; citizens must use those conditions to achieve goals.

2. Accountable, Responsive and Legitimate Government

Most basic outcome

Government that is:

Accountable to citizens
Responsive to needs and expectations
Allows citizen participation in decisions that affect them when possible

Efficiency debate

Non-democratic rulers can decide quickly (no assemblies, majorities, public opinion). Democracy uses deliberation and negotiation → some delay.

But quick decisions may not be accepted → later problems. Democratic delay following procedures may yield decisions more acceptable and more effective. Time cost may be worth it.

Transparency

Democracy based on norms and procedures. Citizens can examine whether correct procedures were followed — transparency. Often missing in non-democracies.

Expect: procedural, accountable government; mechanisms for accountability and participation.

Practices/institutions to look for

Regular, free and fair elections
Open public debate on major policies and legislations
Citizens’ right to information about government

Mixed record: Greater success in regular/free elections and conditions for open debate. Fall short on elections fair to everyone and subjecting every decision to debate. Sharing information not very good—but still much better than non-democracies.

Substantive expectations

Attentive to people’s needs; largely free of corruption — record not impressive. Democracies often frustrate needs, ignore majority demands; corruption common. But nothing shows non-democracies are less corrupt or more sensitive.

Clearest plus: legitimacy

Democratic government may be slow, less efficient, not always responsive or clean—but it is people’s own government. Overwhelming world support; people want rule by elected representatives; believe democracy suitable for their country. Ability to generate its own support is itself an outcome.

South Asia survey evidence in book: strong preference for democracy (Pakistan lower on some measures); high belief democracy suitable; strong agreement on rule by elected leaders; India high on “vote makes a difference” (~67%).

3. Economic Growth and Development

Expectation that good government → development often unmet.

1950–2000 evidence (Table 1):

Category	Growth rate
All democratic regimes	3.95
All dictatorial regimes	4.42
Poor countries under dictatorship	4.34
Poor countries under democracy	4.28

Dictatorships slightly higher overall; among poor countries difference negligible.

Development also depends on population size, global situation, cooperation from others, economic priorities, etc.

Conclusion: Democracy is not a guarantee of economic development; expect it not to lag dictatorships. Prefer democracy for other positive outcomes even when growth differs.

Inequality within democracies (Table 2 examples): South Africa top 20% take 64.8% national income, bottom 20% only 2.9%; Brazil 63.0% / 2.6%; Denmark/Hungary much more equal.

4. Reduction of Inequality and Poverty

More reasonable than growth alone: expect democracies to reduce economic disparities and distribute opportunities justly.

Democracies based on political equality (equal vote weight), yet economic inequalities grow: ultra-rich disproportionate and rising share; bottom incomes declining; difficulty meeting food, clothing, housing, education, health.

Actual life: Democracies not very successful in reducing economic inequalities. In India, poor are large share of voters yet governments not as keen on poverty as expected. Bangladesh: more than half population in poverty; some poor countries depend on rich countries even for food.

5. Accommodation of Social Diversity

Fair expectation: harmonious social life. Earlier chapters: democracies accommodate divisions (Belgium success). Democracies develop procedures for competition → tensions less likely explosive/violent.

No society permanently resolves all group conflict; democracy best suited to respect differences and negotiate. Non-democracies often ignore or suppress differences. Handling social conflict = definite plus—if two conditions met (Sri Lanka warning):

Democracy is not simply rule by majority opinion. Majority must work with minority so government represents general view. Majority/minority opinions are not permanent.
Majority rule must not become rule by majority community (religion, race, language, etc.). Majority means different persons/groups can form majority in different decisions/elections. Democracy remains democracy only while every citizen has a chance of being in majority sometime. If barred by birth, rule ceases to be accommodative.

6. Dignity and Freedom of the Citizens

Democracy much superior in promoting dignity and freedom. Passion for respect and freedom is basis of democracy. Achieved in various degrees; hard for societies built on subordination/domination to accept equality of all individuals.

Women

Historically male-dominated societies. Women’s struggles created sensitivity that equal treatment is necessary for democracy. Women not always treated with respect, but once principle recognised, struggle becomes easier—legally and morally unacceptable to deny. In non-democracy, principle may lack legal/moral force.

Caste (India)

Democracy strengthened claims of disadvantaged/discriminated castes for equal status and opportunity. Atrocities/inequalities still occur but lack moral and legal foundations. Recognition makes citizens value democratic rights.

7. Never-Ending Examination of Democracy

Expectations = criteria for judging democracies. Distinctive feature: examination never over—pass one test, face another; people want more and better democracy. Complaints and dissatisfaction = testimony of success: awareness; ability to look critically at power; transforms subjects into citizens. Most believe their vote makes a difference to government and self-interest.

Balanced Verdict (Exam Style)

Domain	Expectation	Typical record
Accountable/transparent government	High	Mixed; better than non-democracy
Corruption-free / always responsive	High hope	Weak
Legitimacy / popular support	Core	Strong success
Economic growth	Development	Not guaranteed; ≈ dictatorships among poor
Economic equality	Reduce disparities	Often unsuccessful
Social diversity	Harmony via negotiation	Plus if majority ≠ permanent community rule
Dignity/freedom	Superior	Strong in principle; struggles continue