Outcomes of Democracy

What does democracy do?

Or, what outcomes can we reasonably expect of democracy?
Also, does democracy fulfil these expectations in real life?
We begin by thinking about how to assess the outcomes of democracy.
After some clarity on how to think on this subject, we proceed to look at the expected and
actual outcomes of democracy in various respects: quality of government, economic well-
being, inequality, social differences and conflict and finally freedom and dignity.
Our final verdict – positive but qualified – leads us to think about the challenges to democracy
in the next and final chapter.

How do we assess democracy’s outcomes?

 democracy is a better form of government when compared with dictatorship or any
other alternative.
 Many support democracy against other alternatives, such as rule by a monarch or
military or religious leaders.
 not so many of them would be satisfied with the democracy in practice.
 we face a dilemma: democracy is seen to be good in principle, but felt to be not so
good in its practice.
 Do we prefer democracy only for moral reasons? Or are there some prudential reasons
to support democracy too?

Title
1. Over a hundred countries of the world today claim and practice some kind of
democratic politics:
2. they have formal constitutions, they hold elections, they have parties and they
guarantee rights of citizens.
3. While these features are common to most of them, these democracies are very much
different from each other in terms of their social situations, their economic
achievements and their cultures.
4. Clearly, what may be achieved or not achieved under each of these democracies will be
very different.
5. But is there something that we can expect from every democracy, just because it is
democracy?

IT’S NOT THEM IT’S US

1. Our interest in and fascination for democracy often pushes us into taking a position that
democracy can address all socio-economic and political problems.
2. If some of our expectations are not met, we start blaming the idea of democracy
3. Or, we start doubting if we are living in a democracy.
4. The first step towards thinking carefully about the outcomes of democracy is
to recognise that democracy is just a form of government.
5. It can only create conditions for achieving something.
6. The citizens must take advantage of those conditions and achieve those goals.
Is democracy all about coping with multiple pressures and accommodating diverse demands?

Accountable, responsive and legitimate

government
1. In a democracy, we are most concerned with ensuring that:
 people will have the right to choose their rulers and
 people will have control over the rulers.
 Whenever possible and necessary, citizens should be able to participate in
decision making, that affects them all.
Therefore, the most basic outcome of democracy should be that it produces a government
that is accountable to the citizens, and responsive to the needs and expectations of the
citizens.

Is the democratic government efficient? Is it effective?

1. some think that democracy produces less effective government.
2. It is true that non-democratic rulers do not have to bother about deliberation in
assemblies or worry about majorities and public opinion.
3. So, they can be very quick and efficient in decision making and implementation.
4. Democracy is based on the idea of deliberation and negotiation.
5. So, some delay is bound to take place.
Does that make democratic government inefficient?
in terms of costs.
1. In a government that may take decisions very fast :
2. it may take decisions that are not accepted by the people and may therefore face
problems.
3. In contrast, the democratic government will take more time to follow procedures
before arriving at a decision.
4. But because it has followed procedures, its decisions may be both more acceptable to
the people and more effective.
5. So, the cost of time that democracy pays are worth it.

Can you think of what and how the government knows about you and your family (for
example ration cards and voter identity cards)? What are the sources of information for you
about the government?
Transparency
 Democracy ensures that decision making will be based on norms and procedures.
 So, a citizen who wants to know if a decision was taken through the correct procedures
can find this out.
 She has the right and the means to examine the process of decision making.
 This is known as transparency.
 This factor is often missing from a non-democratic government.
 Therefore, when we are trying to find out the outcomes of democracy, it is right to
expect democracy to produce a government that follows procedures and is accountable
to the people.
  We can also expect that the democratic government develops mechanisms for citizens
to hold the government accountable and mechanisms for citizens to take part in
decision making whenever they think fit

If you wanted to measure democracies based on this expected outcome, you would look for
the following practices and institutions:
 regular, free and fair elections;
 open public debate on major policies and legislations;
 and citizens’ right to information about the government and its functioning.
TITLE
 The actual performance of democracies shows a mixed record on this.
 Democracies have had greater success in setting up regular and free elections and in
setting up conditions for open public debate.
 But most democracies fall short of elections that provide a fair chance to everyone and
in subjecting every decision to public debate.
 Democratic governments do not have a very good record when it comes to sharing
information with citizens.
 All one can say in favour of democratic regimes is that they are much better than any
non-democratic regime in these respects
SHORTCOMINGS OF DEMOCRACY
 In substantive terms it may be reasonable to expect from democracy a government
that is attentive to the needs and demands of the people and is largely free of
corruption.
 The record of democracies is not impressive on these two counts.
 Democracies often frustrate the needs of the people and often ignore the demands of
most of its population.
 The routine tales of corruption are enough to convince us that democracy is not free of
this evil.
 At the same time, there is nothing to show that non-democracies are less corrupt or
more sensitive to the people.

POSITIVES OF DEMOCRACY
 There is one respect in which democratic government is certainly better than its
alternatives: democratic government is legitimate government.
 It may be slow, less efficient, not always very responsive or clean.
 But a democratic government is people’s own government.
 That is why there is an overwhelming support for the idea of democracy all over the
world.
 the support exists in countries with democratic regimes & countries without democratic
regimes.
 People wish to be ruled by representatives elected by them.
 They also believe that democracy is suitable for their country.
 Democracy’s ability to generate its own support is itself an outcome that cannot be
ignored.
Economic growth and development
If democracies are expected to produce good governments, then is it not fair to expect that
they would also produce development? Evidence shows that in practice many democracies
did not fulfil this expectation

1. in the fifty years between 1950 and 2000, dictatorships have slightly higher rate of
economic growth.
2. The inability of democracy to achieve higher economic development is worrisome
3. But this alone cannot be reason to reject democracy.
4. Economic development depends on several factors: country’s population size, global
situation, cooperation from other countries, economic priorities adopted by the country,
etc.
5. However, the difference in the rates of economic development between less developed
countries with dictatorships and democracies is negligible.
6. Overall, we cannot say that democracy is a guarantee of economic development.
7. But we can expect democracy not to lag behind dictatorships in this respect.
8. When we find such significant difference in the rates of economic growth between
countries under dictatorship and democracy, it is better to prefer democracy as it has
several other positive outcomes.

Economic outcomes of democracy

1. Arguments about democracy tend to be very passionate.
2. This is how it should be, for democracy appeals to some of our deep values.
3. These debates cannot be resolved in a simple manner.
4. But some debates about democracy can and should be resolved by referring to some
facts and figures.
5. The debate about the economic outcomes of democracy is one such debate.
6. Over the years many students of democracy have gathered careful evidence to see
what the relationship of democracy with economic growth and economic inequalities is.
Democracy is a rule of the majority. The poor are in majority. So democracy must be a rule of
the poor. How can this not be the case?

Reduction of inequality and poverty

1. Perhaps more than development, it is reasonable to expect democracies to reduce
economic disparities.
2. Or do democracies lead to a just distribution of goods and opportunities?
title
1. Democracies are based on political equality.
2. All individuals have equal weight in electing representatives.
3. Parallel to the process of bringing individuals into the political arena on an equal
footing, we find growing economic inequalities.
4. A small number of ultra-rich enjoy a highly disproportionate share of wealth and
incomes.
5. Not only that, their share in the total income of the country has been increasing.
6. Those at the bottom of the society have very little to depend upon.
7. Their incomes have been declining.
8. Sometimes they find it difficult to meet their basic needs of life, such as food, clothing,
house, education and health.
IS ECONOMIC GROWTH IN DEMOCRACIES ACCOMPANIED BY INCREASED INEQUALITIES AMONG
THE PEOPLE?
1. In actual life, democracies do not appear to be very successful in reducing economic
inequalities.
2. In India the poor constitute a large proportion of our voters and no party will like to lose
their votes.
 3. Yet democratically elected governments do not appear to be as keen to address the
question of poverty as you would expect them to.
4. The situation is much worse in some other countries.
5. In Bangladesh, more than half of its population lives in poverty.
6. People in several poor countries are now dependent on the rich countries even for food
supplies
ACCOMMODATION OF SOCIAL DIVERSITY
1. It will be a fair expectation that democracy should produce a harmonious social life.
2. democracies accommodate various social divisions.
3. Eg,Belgium has successfully negotiated differences among ethnic populations.
4. Democracies usually develop a procedure to conduct their competition.
5. This reduces the possibility of these tensions becoming explosive or violent.
BUT…….
1. No society can fully and permanently resolve conflicts among different groups.
2. But we can certainly learn to respect these differences and we can also evolve
mechanisms to negotiate the differences.
3. Democracy is best suited to produce this outcome.
4. Non-democratic regimes often turn a blind eye to or suppress internal social
differences.
5. Ability to handle social differences, divisions and conflicts is thus a definite plus point of
democratic regimes.
6. But the example of Sri Lanka reminds us that a democracy must fulfil two conditions to
achieve this outcome:

 It is necessary to understand that democracy is not simply rule by majority

opinion. The majority always needs to work with the minority so that
governments function to represent the general view. Majority and minority
opinions are not permanent
 It is also necessary that rule by majority does not become rule by majority
community in terms of religion or race or linguistic group, etc. Rule by majority
means that in case of every decision or in case of every election, different
persons and groups may and can form a majority. Democracy remains
democracy only as long as every citizen has a chance of being in majority at
some point of time. If someone is barred from being in majority on the basis of
birth, then the democratic rule ceases to be accommodative for that person or
group
Dignity and freedom of the citizens

 Democracy stands much superior to any other form of government in promoting dignity
and freedom of the individual.
 Every individual wants to receive respect from fellow beings.
 Often conflicts arise among individuals because some feel that they are not treated
with due respect.
 The passion for respect and freedom are the basis of democracy.
 Democracies throughout the world have recognised this, at least in principle.
 This has been achieved in various degrees in various democracies.
 For societies which have been built for long on the basis of subordination and
domination, it is not a simple matter to recognize that all individuals are equal.
WOMEN & CASTE
1. Most societies across the world were historically male dominated societies.
2. Long struggles by women have created some sensitivity today that respect to and
equal treatment of women are necessary ingredients of a democratic society.
3. That does not mean that women are actually always treated with respect.
4. But once the principle is recognised, it becomes easier for women to wage a struggle
against what is now unacceptable legally and morally.
5. In a non-democratic set up, this unacceptability would not have legal basis because the
principle of individual freedom and dignity would not have the legal and moral force
there.
6. The same is true of caste inequalities.
7. Democracy in India has strengthened the claims of the disadvantaged and
discriminated castes for equal status and equal opportunity.
8. There are instances still of caste-based inequalities and atrocities, but these lack the
moral and legal foundations.
9. Perhaps it is the recognition that makes ordinary citizens value their democratic rights
TITLE
1. Expectations from democracy also function as the criteria for judging any democratic
country.
2. What is most distinctive about democracy is that its examination never gets over.
3. As democracy passes one test, it produces another test.
4. As people get some benefits of democracy, they ask for more and want to make
democracy even better.
5. That is why, when we ask people about the way democracy functions, they will always
come up with more expectations, and many complaints.
6. The fact that people are complaining is itself a testimony to the success of democracy:
it shows that people have developed awareness and the ability to expect and to look
critically at power holders and the high and the mighty.
7. A public expression of dissatisfaction with democracy shows the success of the
democratic project: it transforms people from the status of a subject into that of a
citizen.
8. Most individuals today believe that their vote makes a difference to the way the
government is run and to their own self-interest