How and why has the adoption of free market economic policies affected the consolidation of democracy?

Résumé du document

"Economic factors have significant impact on democratization but they are not determinative." (Huntington 1991: 59). To Huntington, there is a clear link between economy and democracy as a form of regime, bond that few people could deny nowadays. Actually, this bond can be shown by the expression "free market democracy", which is used very often by different newspapers. By using this expression, people tend to bring democracy and liberalism, as free market economic policies, together, almost inseparable. No matter what country is studied, economy is always the most important point on the political scene. Everything is conditioned by economic policies, from social policies to military strategy, and "GNP is the dominant explanatory variable" (Huntington 1991: 60). That is why it is not surprising to see that both Polish and Venezuelan leaders have recently taken major decisions regarding economy in their own country.

Extraits

[...] However, as long as the oil prices were high, the Punto Fijo regime was stable and there were no riot or crisis. This could be a limit of what Huntington writes because, even if Punto Fijo corresponded to a democratic regime according to his conditions (free elections, turnover, representation), it was plenty of corruption and nor really representative. So that, in Venezuelan mind, Punto Fijo corresponds to liberal democracy, which is directly associated to failure and corruption. Contrary to Poland, Venezuela seeks to reach democracy through another form of regime. [...]

[...] According to Huntington (1991: rapid growth or economic recession may lead to crises weakening authoritarian regimes: economy can be a factor of stability or disorder. Nowadays, as we saw in the very beginning, the expression “free market democracy” is frequently used. Since 1991 and the fall of the USSR, communist economic policies are seen as failure and leading to dictatorship. On the contrary, liberalism is seen as the winning system, and is developed through the phenomenon of globalization. Examples as North Korea and Cuba are evidence that communism in no longer a suitable economic system for democracy. [...]

[...] As far as Poland is concerned, there were three main influences: Europe, the United States of America, and USSR. For Venezuela, the only external influence was the USA, who had not the same attitude towards Poland than towards Venezuela. Poland, during the 1980s, was a dictatorship under the influence of the USSR. As for many countries of East Central Europe, one external influence was crucial: the EEC, European Economic Community. In Poland, there was a strong feeling in the society that, because of the USSR, they were in the Autre Europe (Other Europe, expression from Jacques Rupnik, 1990). [...]

[...] Even if Poland and Venezuela are not seeking to the same model of democracy, they both have in common the need of globalization and competition market to maintain and strengthen their model of democracy. Nevertheless, globalization can also bring huge inequalities. In some ways, powerful countries get stronger and weak countries get weaker. As a source of inequality, can globalization, through free market economic policies, undermine the transition to democracy ? According to Huntington, transitions to democracy are led by actors and agencies mainly inside the country itself. The role of individuals are very strong and important for him, considering that the movement for democracy comes from the inside. [...]

[...] How and why has the adoption of free market economic policies affected the consolidation of democracy? Countries chosen: Venezuela and Poland “Economic factors have significant impact on democratization but they are not determinative.” (Huntington 1991: 59). To Huntington, there is a clear link between economy and democracy as a form of regime, bond that few people could deny nowadays. Actually, this bond can be shown by the expression “free market democracy”, which is used very often by different newspapers. By using this expression, people tend to bring democracy and liberalism, as free market economic policies, together, almost inseparable. [...]