DOCSLIB.ORG

The Democratic Peace Controversy

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Democratic Peace Controversy INSTITUTT FOR FORSVARSSTUDIER (IFS) Tollbugt. 10, 0152 Oslo. Norge Institutt for forsvarsstudier er en faglig uavhengig institusjon som forvaltnings- messig er underlagt Forsvarets skolesenter (FSS). Det konsultative råd for forsvarsstudier bistår med faglige synspunkter på utvikling og arbeidsoppgaver. Rådet består av representanter for Forsvaret og Universitetet i Oslo. Instituttet driver forskning innenfor fire områder: Norsk sikkerhetspolitikk, sivil-militære relasjoner, internasjonal sikkerhetspolitikk og transatlantiske studier. Direktør: Professor Rolf Tamnes Oslo Files on Defence and Security tar sikte på å være et uformelt og fleksibelt forum for studier innenfor instituttets arbeidsområder. De synspunktene som kommer til uttrykk i Oslo Files, står for forfatterens regning. Hel eller delvis gjengivelse av innholdet kan bare skje med forfatterens samtykke. Redaktør: Anna Therese Klingstedt NORWEGIAN INSTITUTE FOR DEFENCE STUDIES (IFS) Tollbugt. 10, N-0152 Oslo. Norway Institutt for forsvarsstudier – Norwegian Institute for Defence Studies – is an independent institute administratively attached to The Norwegian Defence Education Command. The Consultative Council for Defence Studies assists the Institute in developing and conducting research programmes. The Council is composed of representatives from the Defence Establishment and the University of Oslo. The Institute conducts independent research on Norwegian security policy, civil-military relations, international security policy and on transatlantic studies. Director: Professor Rolf Tamnes Oslo Files on Defence and Security aims to provide an informal and flexible forum for studies within the fields of activity of the Norwegian Institute for De- fence Studies. The viewpoints expressed are those of the authors. The author’s permission is required for any reproduction, wholly or in part, of the contents. Editor: Anna Therese Klingstedt OF_1_2008_Innhold.indd 2 06-02-08 11:04:04 INSTITUTT FOR FORSVARSSTUDIER (IFS) Tollbugt. 10, 0152 Oslo. Norge Institutt for forsvarsstudier er en faglig uavhengig institusjon som forvaltnings- messig er underlagt Forsvarets skolesenter (FSS). Det konsultative råd for forsvarsstudier bistår med faglige synspunkter på utvikling og arbeidsoppgaver. 01 Rådet består av representanter for Forsvaret og Universitetet i Oslo. Instituttet driver forskning innenfor fire områder: Norsk sikkerhetspolitikk, sivil-militære relasjoner, internasjonal sikkerhetspolitikk og transatlantiske studier. Direktør: Professor Rolf Tamnes Oslo Files on Defence and Security tar sikte på å være et uformelt og fleksibelt forum for studier innenfor instituttets arbeidsområder. De synspunktene som kommer til uttrykk i Oslo Files, står for forfatterens regning. Hel eller delvis gjengivelse av innholdet kan bare skje med forfatterens samtykke. Redaktør: Anna Therese Klingstedt NORWEGIAN INSTITUTE FOR DEFENCE STUDIES (IFS) Tollbugt. 10, N-0152 Oslo. Norway Institutt for forsvarsstudier – Norwegian Institute for Defence Studies – is an BORIS BARTH independent institute administratively attached to The Norwegian Defence Education Command. The Consultative Council for Defence Studies assists the Institute in developing and conducting research programmes. The Council is composed of representatives from the Defence Establishment and the University The Democratic Peace of Oslo. The Institute conducts independent research on Norwegian security policy, civil-military relations, international security policy and on transatlantic Controversy studies. Director: Professor Rolf Tamnes A Critical Survey Oslo Files on Defence and Security aims to provide an informal and flexible forum for studies within the fields of activity of the Norwegian Institute for De- fence Studies. The viewpoints expressed are those of the authors. The author’s permission is required for any reproduction, wholly or in part, of the contents. Editor: Anna Therese Klingstedt OSLO FILES ON DEFENCE AND SECURITY– 01/2008 OF_1_2008_Innhold.indd 3 06-02-08 11:04:05 BORIS BARTH THE DEMocratic PEACE CONTROVERSY (b. 1961) is Professor in modern history at the University of Konstanz. He has a PhD in modern history from Heinrich Heine University, Düsseldorf. Barth has The ProbLEM1 also worked as Visiting Professor at Charles University, Prague. Barth’s publi- The central idea of the “democratic peace” theory (DP) can be summed up in cations list includes several titles, among them Genozid : Völkermord im 20. one sentence: Democracies do not go to war with one another, they have cre- Jahrhundert : Geschichte, Theorien, Kontroversen (2006). ated a kind of separate peace.2 This theory is extremely popular among some American political scientists and was taken over by several German and Scan- dinavian scholars during the 1990s. Two American Presidents, such different personalities as Bill Clinton and George W. Bush, have declared in public that ABSTRACT they strongly favour the theory. Clinton called the expansion of democracy the “third pillar” of his foreign policy, and one can even talk about a Clinton doc- The central idea of “democratic peace” theory (DP) is that democracies do not trine. The President was convinced that democracies will not fight wars against go to war with another. Since the 1960s this theory has been extremely popular each other, that they will trade freely, and that they will respect their citizen’s among political scientists, but there are a number of methodological problems human rights. On 5th February 1992, after the breakdown of the Soviet empire, attached to the exploration of DP theory. Quantitative tests with few variables James Baker, the American foreign secretary, perceived an opportunity to forge raise the question of validity. How to distinguish between war and peace, and a democratic peace.3 In 1994, Anthony Lake, the American national security how to define democracy are but a few of the problems “democratic peace” adviser proclaimed that the spread of democracy serves American interests, be- theorists must encounter. This study discusses several different concepts of de- cause democracies “tend not to … wage war on one another”. Also in 1994 the mocracy, showing that there has been a huge variety of more or less democratic leaders of the G7 states discussed the proposal that the promotion of democra- systems through history; a point which is often lost when using cases spanning tisation be made a central part of their security policy.4 The administration of over a highly diversified universe in terms of space and time. George W. Bush turned Clinton’s doctrine of peace and security into a crusade Another problematic aspect of the theory is that of democratisation as for democracy.5 During the 1990s one central maxim of American foreign policy such. Democratisation has proven to be a potentially dangerous transformation was to promote global democratisation to secure peace. process with the capacity of breeding lethal nationalism and intolerance. In spite Several American authors still treat the democratic peace theory not as a of all these problems, there are regions in the world where democracies have hypothesis, but as a law, because, they claim the empirical regularities cannot been peaceful neighbours for decades. However, the idea of “democratic peace” be ignored. Jack S. Levy formulated the often quoted sentence: “[…] in general, does not satisfactorily explain these phenomena, and there is a need for further wars involving all or nearly all of the great powers, democratic states have never historical research into this field. fought on opposite sides. This absence of war between democracies comes as 1 Thanks to Rolf Hobson for friendly support and many constructive debates. 2 Nils Peter Gleditsch, “Democracy and Peace”, Journal of Peace Research, no. 29 (1992): 369. 3 John M. Owen, “How Liberalism Produces Democratic Peace”, International Security, no. 19 (1994): 87 and 97; Charles W. Kegley and Margaret G. Hermann, “Military Intervention and the Democratic Peace”, International Interactions, no. 21 (1995): 1; Jack Snyder, From Voting to Violence. Democratization and nationalist conflict (New York: Norton, 2000), p. 17. INSTITUTT FOR forsvarsstudier Norwegian Institute for Defence Studies 4 Kegley and Hermann, “Military Intervention and the Democratic Peace”: 79. ISSN 1504-6753 © Norwegian Institute for Defence Studies 5 Thomas Schwartz and Kiron K. Skinner, “The Myth of the Democratic Peace”, Orbis, [email protected] – www.ifs.mil.no no. 46 (2002): 159. OF_1_2008_Innhold.indd 4 06-02-08 11:04:06 BORIS BARTH THE DEMocratic PEACE CONTROVERSY (b. 1961) is Professor in modern history at the University of Konstanz. He has a PhD in modern history from Heinrich Heine University, Düsseldorf. Barth has The ProbLEM1 also worked as Visiting Professor at Charles University, Prague. Barth’s publi- The central idea of the “democratic peace” theory (DP) can be summed up in cations list includes several titles, among them Genozid : Völkermord im 20. one sentence: Democracies do not go to war with one another, they have cre- Jahrhundert : Geschichte, Theorien, Kontroversen (2006). ated a kind of separate peace.2 This theory is extremely popular among some American political scientists and was taken over by several German and Scan- dinavian scholars during the 1990s. Two American Presidents, such different personalities as Bill Clinton and George W. Bush, have declared in public that ABSTRACT they strongly favour the theory. Clinton called the expansion of democracy the “third pillar” of his
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Tradition of Ancient Greek Democracy and Its Importance for Modem Democracy
    DEMOCRAC AHMOKPATI The Tradition of Ancient Greek Democracy and its Importance for Modern Democracy Mogens Herman Hansen The Tradition of Ancient Greek Democracy and its Importance for Modem Democracy B y M ogens H erman H ansen Historisk-filosofiske Meddelelser 93 Det Kongelige Danske Videnskabernes Selskab The Royal Danish Academy of Sciences and Letters Copenhagen 2005 Abstract The two studies printed here investigate to what extent there is a con­ nection between ancient and modem democracy. The first study treats the tradition of ancient Greek democracy, especially the tradition of Athenian democracy from ca. 1750 to the present day. It is argued that in ideology there is a remarkable resemblance between the Athenian democracy in the Classical period and the modem liberal democracy in the 19th and 20th centuries. On the other hand no direct tradition con­ nects modem liberal democracy with its ancient ancestor. Not one single Athenian institution has been copied by a modem democracy, and it is only from ca. 1850 onwards that the ideals cherished by the Athenian democrats were referred to approvingly by modem cham­ pions of democracy. It is in fact the IT technology and its potential for a return to a more direct form of democracy which has given rise to a hitherto unmatched interest in the Athenian democratic institutions. This is the topic of the second study in which it is argued that the focus of the contemporary interest is on the Athenian system of sortition and rotation rather than on the popular assembly. Contents The Tradition of Democracy from Antiquity to the Present Time .................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Theories of War and Peace
    1 THEORIES OF WAR AND PEACE POLI SCI 631 Rutgers University Fall 2018 Jack S. Levy [email protected] http://fas-polisci.rutgers.edu/levy/ Office Hours: Hickman Hall #304, Tuesday after class and by appointment "War is a matter of vital importance to the State; the province of life or death; the road to survival or ruin. It is mandatory that it be thoroughly studied." Sun Tzu, The Art of War In this seminar we undertake a comprehensive review of the theoretical and empirical literature on interstate war, focusing primarily on the causes of war and the conditions of peace but giving some attention to the conduct and termination of war. We emphasize research in political science but include some coverage of work in other disciplines. We examine the leading theories, their key causal variables, the paths or mechanisms through which those variables lead to war or to peace, and the degree of empirical support for various theories. Our survey includes research utilizing a variety of methodological approaches: qualitative, quantitative, experimental, formal, and experimental. Our primary focus, however, is on the logical coherence and analytic limitations of the theories and the kinds of research designs that might be useful in testing them. The seminar is designed primarily for graduate students who want to understand – and ultimately contribute to – the theoretical and empirical literature in political science on war, peace, and security. Students with different interests and students from other departments can also benefit from the seminar and are also welcome. Ideally, members of the seminar will have some familiarity with basic issues in international relations theory, philosophy of science, research design, and statistical methods.
    [Show full text]
  • Postcolonial Theory and Law: a Critical Introduction
    Alpana Roy* POSTCOLONIAL THEORY AND LAW: A CRITICAL INTRODUCTION ABSTRACT The purpose of this article is to encourage legal scholars to engage more actively with postcolonial discourse. To this end, the article will outline key concepts in postcolonial theory — such as colonialism, imperialism, decolonisation and neo-colonialism, and will also trace the work of major theorists in this area — Frantz Fanon, Homi Bhabha, Gayatri Spivak, and Edward Said. As this article presents itself as a contribution to the study of postcolonial theory and the law, it will focus on contemporary developments in Australian law reform. Specifically, the article will discuss the Law Reform Commission of Western Australia’s Final Report on Aboriginal Customary Laws. I INTRODUCTION hile conversations between law and postcolonialism have been ‘infrequent’1 and remain largely unmapped, postcolonial discourse is now the major methodological tool with which to trace the patterns of epistemological and pedagogic reterritorialisation of the Wnon-Western w orld. With respect to legal discourse, Peter Fitzpatrick and Eve Darian-Smith suggest that ‘postcolonialism is now the main mode in which the West’s relation to its “other” is critically explored, and law has been…[in] the forefront of that very relation’.2 Nevertheless, while postcolonial theory’s status as a discipline may arguably be more established in other academic areas, it is increasingly being recognised by legal scholars as a methodological tool with which to scrutinise the nature of legal discourse.3 * Lecturer, Faculty of Law, University of Technology, Sydney. I would like to note my sincere thanks to Jenni Millbank for all of her constructive comments on various drafts of this article.
    [Show full text]
  • Can Democracy Create World Peace? Democratic Peace Theory: Misguided Policy Or Panacea
    Can Democracy Create World Peace? Democratic Peace Theory: Misguided Policy or Panacea Alynna Lyon Department of Political Science an democracy create world peace? The idea that Democratic Peace and Political Science representative liberal governments can dimin- In the 1970s, scholars began using the tools of social ish the occurrence of war is one of the most science to explore this thesis and have uncovered a Cappealing, influential, and at the same time, contro- significant amount of empirical research that supports versial ideas of our time. For centuries, thinkers have these claims. Today there are over a hundred authors proposed that a world of democratic countries would who have published scholarly works on the Democratic be a peaceful world. As early as 1795, Immanuel Kant Peace Theory. One study examined 416 country-to- wrote in his essay Perpetual Peace that democracies country wars from 1816-1980 and found that only 12 are less warlike. Within the United States, this idea has were fought between democracies.3 Bruce Russett writes held particular sway. Presidents like Woodrow Wilson that “Established democracies fought no wars against have embraced this idea and advocated the creation of one another during the entire twentieth century.”4 democracies to create a less belligerent world. Harry S. Another proponent found that that the probability of Truman once said, “Totalitarian regimes imposed on any two democracies engaging in war is less than half free peoples…undermine the foundation of internation- of 1%!5 This is not to say that democracies have not gone al peace and hence security of the United States.”1 to war, but when considering pairs (or dyads) of democ- The Democratic Peace Theory is based on several racies, there are almost no instances of war between premises.
    [Show full text]
  • Remarks on the Ancient Evidence for Democratic Peace Author(S): Spencer R
    Remarks on the Ancient Evidence for Democratic Peace Author(s): Spencer R. Weart Source: Journal of Peace Research, Vol. 38, No. 5 (Sep., 2001), pp. 609-613 Published by: Sage Publications, Ltd. Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/424778 . Accessed: 10/03/2011 14:37 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=sageltd. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. Sage Publications, Ltd. is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of Peace Research. http://www.jstor.org ? 2001 Journal PeaceResearch, )r^^^^Q^M of vol. 38, no.
    [Show full text]
  • Democracy and Deterrence Foundations for an Enduring World Peace
    Democracy and Deterrence Foundations for an Enduring World Peace DR. WALTER GARY SHARP SR. Air University Press Maxwell Air Force Base, Alabama May 2008 Muir S. Fairchild Research Information Center Cataloging Data Sharp, Walter Gary. Democracy and deterrence : foundations for an enduring world peace / Walter Gary Sharp, Sr. p. ; cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-1-58566-180-0 1. Deterrence (Strategy) 2. Democracy. 3. War—Prevention. I. Title. 327.172—dc22 Disclaimer Opinions, conclusions, and recommendations expressed or implied within are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of Air University, the United States Air Force, the Department of Defense, or any other US government agency. Cleared for public release: distribution unlimited. Air University Press 131 West Shumacher Avenue Maxwell AFB, AL 36112-5962 http://aupress.maxwell.af.mil ii Dedicated to my loving wife Anne Marie Sharp from whom all good in my life flows Contents Chapter Page DISCLAIMER . ii DEDICATION . iii FOREWORD . ix ABOUT THE AUTHOR . xi PREFACE . xiii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS . xv 1 LIBERAL DEMOCRACY AND ITS GLOBAL INFLUENCE . 1 Features of a Liberal Democracy . 2 Global Political Trends . 7 Notes . 17 2 CONVENTIONAL THEORIES OF WAR AND WAR AVOIDANCE . 19 Conventional Thinking on the Cause of War . 21 Conventional Approaches to War Avoidance . 24 Deterrence as a Tool of War Avoidance . 31 The Law of Conflict Management . 35 The Future of Armed Conflict . 38 Notes . 40 3 THE DEMOCRATIC PEACE PRINCIPLE . 45 The Early Debate . 45 Contemporary Studies and Methodologies . 49 Explanations for the Democratic Peace Principle . 63 Challenges and Alternate Rationales .
    [Show full text]
  • The Social Market Roots of Democratic Peace the Social Market Michael Mousseau Roots of Democratic Peace
    The Social Market Roots of Democratic Peace The Social Market Michael Mousseau Roots of Democratic Peace One of the most im- portant achievements in the study of international security has been the arrival and broad acceptance of the “democratic peace,” that is, the statistically signiªcant absence of war between democracies. This discovery has produced a broader acceptance of domestic factors in the study of international conºict. It has also inºuenced public policy: since the early 1990s, U.S. policymakers have widely embraced democracy as a cause of peace. The extent to which scholars and practitioners can be convinced that democ- racy causes peace, however, depends on how conªdent they are in explaining it. Numerous studies have identiªed democracy as a cause of democratic peace, but none have yielded much meaningful, clear-cut, and nontrivial pre- dictive power—achievements that lie at the heart of scientiªcally identifying causality. On the contrary, it appears increasingly likely that existing explana- tions for how democracy causes peace may be incomplete. Several studies have shown that the impact of democracy on peace may depend on the level of economic development.1 No compelling challenges to these ªndings have been offered, and some scholars who once conªrmed the democratic peace now acknowledge the role played by economic conditionality.2 It follows that Michael Mousseau is Associate Professor of International Relations at Koç University in Istanbul, Turkey. The author wishes to thank Selim Erdem Aytaç, Michael Bernhard, John Drabble, Demet Yalçin & Mousseau, Bruce Russett, Richard Sherman, Nail Tanriöven, Insan Tunali, John Vasquez, Quhnaz Yilmaz, and the anonymous reviewers, all of whom identiªed areas for improvement.
    [Show full text]
  • Theories of War and Peace
    1 THEORIES OF WAR AND PEACE POLSGR8832 Jack S. Levy Columbia University Fall 2018 [email protected] [email protected] http://fas-polisci.rutgers.edu/levy/ Office Hours: Fridays 12-2pm IAB, and by appointment "War is a matter of vital importance to the State; the province of life or death; the road to survival or ruin. It is mandatory that it be thoroughly studied." Sun Tzu, The Art of War In this seminar we undertake a comprehensive review of the theoretical and empirical literature on interstate war, focusing primarily on the causes of war and the conditions of peace but giving some attention to the conduct and termination of war. We emphasize research in political science but include some coverage of work in other disciplines. We examine the leading theories, their key causal variables, the paths or mechanisms through which those variables lead to war or to peace, and the degree of empirical support for various theories. Our survey includes research utilizing a variety of methodological approaches: qualitative, quantitative, experimental, formal, and experimental. Our primary focus, however, is on the logical coherence and analytic limitations of the theories and the kinds of research designs that might be useful in testing them. The seminar is designed primarily for graduate students who want to understand – and ultimately contribute to – the theoretical and empirical literature in political science on war, peace, and security. Students with different interests and students from other disciplines can also benefit from the seminar and contribute to it, and are also welcome. Ideally, members of the seminar will have some familiarity with basic issues in international relations theory, philosophy of science, research design, and statistical methods.
    [Show full text]
  • Proquest Dissertations
    Ari stophanes 'A charnians: Pursuing Peace with an Iambic Peitho Eleni Panagiotarakou A Thesis In the Special Individualized Program Presented in Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements For the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy at Concordia Univeristy Montreal, Quebec, Canada May 2009 © Eleni Panagiotarakou Library and Archives Bibliotheque et 1*1 Canada Archives Canada Published Heritage Direction du Branch Patrimoine de I'edition 395 Wellington Street 395, rue Wellington Ottawa ON K1A 0N4 OttawaONK1A0N4 Canada Canada Your file Votre reference ISBN: 978-0-494-63382-3 Our Tile Notre reference ISBN: 978-0-494-63382-3 NOTICE: AVIS: The author has granted a non­ L'auteur a accorde une licence non exclusive exclusive license allowing Library and permettant a la Bibliotheque et Archives Archives Canada to reproduce, Canada de reproduire, publier, archiver, publish, archive, preserve, conserve, sauvegarder, conserver, transmettre au public communicate to the public by par telecommunication ou par I'lnternet, preter, telecommunication or on the Internet, distribuer et vendre des theses partout dans le loan, distribute and sell theses monde, a des fins commerciales ou autres, sur worldwide, for commercial or non­ support microforme, papier, electronique et/ou commercial purposes, in microform, autres formats. paper, electronic and/or any other formats. The author retains copyright L'auteur conserve la propriete du droit d'auteur ownership and moral rights in this et des droits moraux qui protege cette these. Ni thesis. Neither the thesis nor la these ni des extra its substantiels de celle-ci substantial extracts from it may be ne doivent etre imprimes ou autrement printed or otherwise reproduced reproduits sans son autorisation.
    [Show full text]
  • Rome Compiled Background Guide Final Online
    Roman Republic (1849) MUNUC 33 ONLINE1 Roman Republic (1849) | MUNUC 33 Online TABLE OF CONTENTS ______________________________________________________ CHAIR LETTER……………………………….………………………….……..…3 CRISIS DIRECTOR LETTER……………………………………………………….5 ANCIENT ROME………………………………………………………………….7 MODERN CONTEXT OF ROME AND THE PAPAL STATES…………………..22 CURRENT ISSUES………………………………………………………………. 36 MAP…………………………………………………………………………….. 39 CHARACTER BIOGRAPHIES…………………………………………………. 40 BIBLIOGRAPHY………………………………………………………………...59 2 Roman Republic (1849) | MUNUC 33 Online CHAIR LETTER ____________________________________________________ Dear Delegates, Welcome to the Roman Republic of 1849! I will be your chair for the weekend of MUNUC, during which time I’ll represent Giuseppe Mazzini. I’m incredibly excited to welcome you to a little-known (and less understood) time in history! The Roman Republic of 1849 represents how people tried to bring ideals of individuality, freedom, and equality to reality. Although the real-world Republic fell to a French invasion, I hope that you can gather your creativity, knowledge, and collaboration to change history and build a Republic that will last. I’m a current senior at the University of Chicago, studying Biology with a specialization in Endocrinology on the pre-medical track. I staff MUNUC, run our collegiate conference ChoMUN as Director-General, and compete on our travel team. Outside of MUN, I do research in a genetic neurobiology lab with fruit flies, volunteer at the UChicago Hospital, and TA for courses such as Organic Chemistry, Genetics, and Core Biology. I also like to write poetry, paint, and perform Shakespeare! If at any point you want to share something or ask a question, on anything from your favorite novel to college life, just reach out to me at [email protected].
    [Show full text]
  • The World-Wide Spread of Democracy in the Modern Age - Daniel M
    WORLD SYSTEM HISTORY – Democratization: The World-Wide Spread of Democracy in the Modern Age - Daniel M. Green DEMOCRATIZATION: THE WORLD-WIDE SPREAD OF DEMOCRACY IN THE MODERN AGE Daniel M. Green Department of Political Science and International Relations, University of Delaware, USA Keywords: Democracy, Liberalism, Republicanism, Liberal Movements, Revolutions, Post-Cold War Moment. Contents 1. Introduction 2. Early European Republicanism, to 1517 3. Early Modern Democracy, 1517-1814 3.1. The Dutch, the English, and Liberal Advantage, 1562-1609 3.2. English Events, 1642-1689: Civil War and Glorious Revolution 3.3. The Enlightenment, 1715-1776 3.4. The Age of Revolution, 1776-1814 4. Liberalism in Europe, 1814-1848 4.1. The Revolutions of 1830 4.2. The Revolutions of 1848 4.3. Britain as Liberal Power? 4.4. Scientific Racism and the Standard of Civilization: Europe and the World, 1856- 1914 5. Democracy Unbound: Three Liberal Moments, 1919, 1945, 1989 5.1. WWI and Its Moment 5.2. WWII and Its Moment 5.3. The Post-Cold War Moment, 1989-2001? 5.4. Today’s Democratic Challenges 6. Conclusions Bibliography Biographical Sketch 1. Introduction We liveUNESCO today in what is, in historical terms,– EOLSSthe “Golden Age of Democracy.” After explosive growth in the number of democracies in the 1990-1995 periods (from 70 to 114) we now find ourselves in a world with more democratic regimes than ever before. By the late 1990sSAMPLE there were over 120 democratic CHAPTERS countries and, for the first time in history, the majority of the world’s population was living under democratic rule.
    [Show full text]
  • Peace in Multi-State Systems E Bruce Brooks John V Lombardi University of Massachusetts at Amherst WSWG Note 266 (4 Dec 2002)
    245 Peace in Multi-State Systems E Bruce Brooks John V Lombardi University of Massachusetts at Amherst WSWG Note 266 (4 Dec 2002) Abstract. The multi-state system is a political configuration that recurs in history. Among the better known examples are classical China, classical Greece, pre-Mauryan India, and Renaissance Italy.1 Modern Europe is an important test case for the theory of such systems. Like classical Greece, but unlike classical China or Renaissance Italy, Europe has not coalesced into one state, but has persisted for centuries asasystem.2 These different historical outcomes raise theoretical questions of some interest. We here test against ancient and modern examples one theory of the behavior of states.3 This is the Democratic Peace (DP) theory,4 which holds that democratic states never attack each other, or do so far less often than do nondemocratic states.5 If so, democratic political structure in single states will be a significant predictor of system stability. The DP theory seems to be successful in predicting known outcomes in early China (no democratic states, continual war, unification) and also in early Greece (some democratic states; some war; no unification). We note, however, that the theory fails with modern South America, and conclude that factors other than political structure must be invoked to explain multi-state outcomes, whether ancient or modern. Data. DP theories abound; some proponents emphasize the “liberal” aspect of “democracy.”6 We chose for testing the Polity IV list, which assigns to states a democracy index ranging from -10 to +10, on criteria established by CIDCM.7 1Participants at the 16th WSWG Conference on multi-state systems (22-23 May 2002), considered these four cases plus the classic Maya and Samguk Korea.
    [Show full text]