Transition to Democracy And associated conceptual frameworks

Interesting articles  Larry Diamond: “Is the Third Wave over?” f_democracy/v007/7.3/diamond.html  Paul Lewis: “Theories of Democratisation and Patterns of Regime Change in Eastern Europe” Journal of Communist Studies and Transition Politics Vol13, No1, March1997  R.F.M.Lubbers: “A response to Samuel Huntington”

Samuel P.Huntington TThree waves of democratization 1 1 11974-present FFirst two ended with a “reverse wave”

Diamond’s Table 1

Lewis’s groups 1997  Group 1  Hungary  Poland  Czech Republic  Slovenia  Intermediate  Bulgaria  Slovakia  Group 2  Romania  Croatia  Albania  Serbia

Hang on a minute, what about?  Estonia [in first group of applicant countries]  Lithuania  Latvia  Bosnia  Macedonia  Ukraine  Moldova  Byelarus  Russia  Georgia  Armenia  Azerbaijan

E.U.’s two groups of applicants  Hungary  Poland  Estonia  Czech Republic  Slovenia  Cyprus  Bulgaria  Latvia  Lithuania  Rumania  Slovakia  Turkey

Explanations  Group 2 primarily Ottoman, Group1 Austo-Hungarian/North European  Group 2 Orthodox Christian or Muslim; Group 1 Catholic or Protestant  such explanations stress cultural and historical factors

Explanations 2  Group 2 countries had stable communist rule  Group 1 had history of instability and ideological revisionism  Elite mass relations very different under Communist rule

Explanations 3  Civil society strong in group 1 countries  Poland: church  Hungary: dissident elections and early political parties  Czechs; artists  East Germany: Lutheran peace groups  Slovenia; punks and youth groups

More on Civil society  Revolts: GDR 1953; Hungary Poland 1956; Czechoslovakia 1968; Poland  pluralism developed as leadership retreated during 1980s  So civil society began to organise itself pre-1989

Explanations 4  Group 1 communist regimes modes of exit involved social movements that negotiated elections [Poland, Hungary, Czechoslovakia]  Group 2 exit by coup or elite reshuffle; pace of democratisation delayed

Explanations 5  Modernization and socio-economic development higher in Group 1  GDP per capita higher  urbanisation higher  % working in agriculture lower

Debate: Modernisation v Elite Choice  Lipset  Dahl  Huntington  Pye  O’Donnell and Schmitter  Przeworski  Bova  von Beyme  Welsh