Outcomes of Democracy

Pointwise summary of the lesson

Why do people support Democracy?
• Promotes equality among citizens.
• Enhances the dignity of the individual.
• Improves the quality of decision making.
• Provides a method to resolve conflicts; and,
• Allows room to correct mistakes.
Why do people Criticise Democracy?
Democracy appears to be good in principle but felt not so good in practice. People prefer democracy to other
forms of government, but they are not happy with many outcomes of Democracy. The following are the proof.
• Democracy has been largely successful in holding elections on regular basis. These elections are largely
free of corruption, but they do not provide fair chance for everyone to win or lose. Mostly rich candidates
and big parties win elections.
• Democracy has not been successful in producing responsive government.
• The routine tales of corruption frustrates the people.
• Democracy has failed to reduce economic inequality and poverty.
• Not all democratic countries are successful in accommodating social diversity. Sri Lanka is an example
Two conditions to consider before assessing democracy
a) All countries that claim themselves to be democracies because they have a formal constitution, parties are
there, elections are held and some rights are given to people. But what democracy can achieve varies from
country to country. The success of democracy depends on how the people practice it. It also depends on
nature of the society, population size etc.
b) Our interest and fascination for democracy may push us to believe that Democracy can solve all socio-
economic and political problems. If that doesn’t happen, we start blaming democracy. Democracy is just a
form of Govt. like any other, but it can create conditions for people to fulfil the objectives

The Five Outcomes of Democracy

Political Outcome : Accountable, Responsive and Legitimate Government
It is the most basic outcome

Accountability
• An accountable government is one that is answerable to the people
• Democracy can produce an only when it fulfills the following conditions.
i) Free, Fair and Regular Elections
ii) Public Debate
iii) Sharing of Information and Transparency

I. Free, fair and regular elections:
• We expect democracy to create a condition where free and fair elections are held regularly.
• f the government doesn’t function to our satisfaction, we should be free to bring it down.
• Most democracies have been doing very well in this regard.
• Elections are regularly held. They are largely free of corruption but they do not provide fair chance for all

Public Debate
• Decision making process is the prime element of public debate. We expect democracy not to take any
decision against the public opinion.
• Some people think that democracy doesn’t produce an effective government because the decision-making
process is very slow.
• Non-democratic governments can take quick decisions because they don’t have to bother about
deliberations and norms; neither do they about public opinion.
• The decision taken in non-democratic governments are not likely to be accepted by the majority and are
not likely to affect people positively.
• It is not the case with democracy because it must follow certain norms and procedures. A public debate
must be initiated and the same debated in the legislature.
• Though democracy stands at a better position in this regard in comparison to non-democratic
governments, the actual realisation of the expectation is not satisfactory.
Sharing of Information and Transparency
• A citizen in democracy 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.
• Though most democracies have created conditions to share information with the public, the actual sharing
of information is not satisfactory.
• 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.

II. Responsive Government
• A responsive government is one that exhibits sensitivity to people’s needs and aspirations.
• Democracy can produce responsive government when it honours majority opinion and works for their
welfare.
• It also should give such a governance which is corruption free.
• But, democracy’s performance has not been impressive on these counts.
• Governments neglect majority opinion and there is a lot of corruption.
• The only defense for democracy is that there is no proof to show that non-democratic forms of
governments are more responsive and less corrupt.

III. Legitimacy
• A Legitimate Government is one which is legally and morally accepted by the majority.
• There is large support for democracy all over the world as in South Asia.
• For example, about 70% of people in India prefer democracy all times.
• About same percentage of people support democracy all times in most countries.
• Moreover, Democracy has spread to most part of the world. Most countries in the world are Democratic
Countries.
• Democracy may be slow in taking decision, it may not be very responsive and clean, but it is legitimate
because it is people choice.
• Democracy has the ability to generate support for itself.

Economic Outcomes
I. Economic Growth and Development
• When Democracy is compared with Dictatorship between the years 1950 and 2000, the data shows that
Democracy could not achieve as much economic development as Dictatorship.
• The inability of democracy to achieve economic growth worries us but that shouldn’t be the sole reason
for us to reject democracy for the following reasons.
i) A country’s economic development is determined by several factors. They are, country’s population
size, global situation, cooperation from other countries, economic priorities adopted by the country
and the type of Government. The type of Government is one of the many factors.
ii) The difference between Poor countries under Dictatorship and Poor countries under democracy is
negligible. It is just 0.06%
iii) There are many positives that people enjoy in Democracy which are absent in Dictatorship.
iv) The biggest Democracy of the world, India, became Democratic country only in 1950 and began
observing rapid economic growth only after 1991. (After Liberalisation)
v) Democracy is not a guarantee of economic growth and development but certainly doesn’t lag
Dictatorship by far.

II. Reduction of Inequality and Poverty
• Democracy has achieved political equality, that is, one person -one vote – one value.
• It has not been successful in achieving economic equality.
• The gap between the rich and the poor is increasing.
• A very small percentage of ultra-rich people have the largest concentration of wealth and incomes.
• For example, only 300 people of the world have about half of the world’s wealth.
• In India, just 1 % people have 73% of India’s wealth.
• The poor at the bottom find it very difficult to meet their basic requirements. They are at the mercy of the
Governments.
• Though governments are formed mostly because of the votes of the poor, the governments are very keen
to address the issue of economic inequality and poverty.
• Some countries like Bangladesh are so poor that they even import food grains from developed countries.
• Thus, democracy has failed to produce this outcome.

Social Outcomes
I. Accommodation of Social Diversity
• Democracy is best suited produce this outcome.
• It can accommodate social diversity that leads to peaceful and harmonious life among the citizens.
• Every country has social diversity. So, conflicts between social groups can happen naturally.
• No form of government can handle social conflicts permanently.
• In non-democratic forms of government, the voice of the minority social group is either unheard or
suppressed.
• Democracy can develop mechanism to accommodate social diversities as it did in Belgium.
• The story of Sri Lanka shows that Democracy needs to create the following two conditions to
accommodate social diversity.
i) In a democratic country, majority opinion should rule. But this rule should not be absolutist. The
majority should work with minority opinion to reflect the general view of the society. The majority and
minority divisions are not permanent.
ii) Majority rule should not become the rule of majority community or any community. Every person, in
every context and in every election must get a fair chance of being on the majority side. If the person
is not allowed to be on the majority just because he belongs to a minority social group, then she/he
feels neglected. Democracy ceases to be accommodative for such a person and the social group the
person belongs to.

II. Dignity and Freedom of Citizens
• Democracy stands much superior to any other forms of government to produce this outcome.
• Dignity, Freedom, and respect are the bases of Democracy. Democracy has at least recognised this in
principle.
• But democracy hasn’t achieved uniformly in achieving dignity and freedom of the citizens in all countries.
• In societies that are built on subordination and domination, it is not easy to recognise that all men and
women are equal.
• For example, it is only recently people have accepted that equal treatment and respect of women are
necessary ingredients of Democracy.
• But people of different social groups are exploited even today. We find gender based, race based, caste-
based exploitations continue.
• But such exploitations do not have legal or moral support. Democracy has created such a condition.
• This where democracy stand superior to other forms of Governments.
• This element is absent in non-democratic countries.
Statements and their explanations
1. Expectations of Democracy can serve as criteria to judge democracy in any country
• To judge anything, we select certain criteria.
• The five outcomes of Democracy can serve as criteria to judge how democracy functions in any country.
• For example, using the criteria we can say that, Sri Lanka achieved better economic growth and
development (It has better HDI ranking) but it failed to accommodate social diversity
2. The most distinctive feature of Democracy is that its examination never gets over
• As people some benefits of democracy, they demand more.
• At any given point in time, people have complaints against democracy, and they have suggestions to
reform democracy.
• Since the French revolution, Democracy has evolved to the present state, facing challenges after
challenges.
• Democracy still faces challenges and will face challenges in future too. Such challenges are the
examinations that democracy faces. Its examination never gets over.
3. That the people are complaining about democracy itself is a testimony to the success of Democracy
4. A public expression of dissatisfaction with democracy shows the success of the democratic project
• As people get some benefits from democracy, they demand more.
• Now a days, people don’t suffer miseries quietly.
• They express their dissatisfaction publicly and complain about the failure of democracy.
• They hold the high and the mighty responsible for the wrongs that happen in the society.
• People today know that their votes matter a lot in determining how they live and how the country is
governed.
• Thus, Democracy has transformed people from being passive subjects to active citizens.