Gibson Nyikadzino
A LOT of nonsense is talked about democracy especially in the relatively rich Western countries who attribute their comparative wealth and well-being to hard work, the liberal capitalist system and the democratic form of government. The benefits of democracy are relative. It depends with who you are, where you are in the global system, how wealthy your state is compared to others and where you are in the evolution of your own political system and who you are.
The United States of America (USA) last week issued an interesting statement to countries holding elections this year. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said his country is committed to supporting “free, fair, inclusive elections.”
In three weeks time, the US is going for elections. Today, violence and polarisation have become identity characteristics in the run-up to the November 3 elections. Democracy does not require violence and polarisation even in the name of “nationalism.” This is such a superpower keen on lecturing other countries how to live, conduct elections and uphold democracy. But, have you ever wondered if elections are democratic in this superpower state? Do you ever think if elections are organized democratically? As of October 09, some 1, 216 candidates of various levels of seriousness had filed with the USA’s Federal Election Commission to run for president on November 3. Unfortunately many people only know of incumbent Donald Trump and democratic challenger Joe Biden, and their mates, Mike Pence and Kamala Harris.
On five occasions in the history of the USA have presidents emerged without being elected by the popular vote. These presidents were elected or chosen “by the people who have the right to vote.” In the USA, the popular vote has its weakness because of how the USA electoral system is managed. But, no one has ever blamed the USA electoral system. However, key policy drivers of USA elections tell nations no to “worry because elections are being conducted the way they should.” Americans love their system despite its democratic shortcomings.
This is probably none of our business!
Today, the same USA and her Western allies lecture other countries about what democracy is, a scenario that raises the “one size fits all” aspect. The developed countries should not abandon their democracy, at the same time, it should be noted that their democracy is not the right recommendation for all countries because of circumstances.
After 1989 and the collapse of Soviet communism, the West anticipated that for Russia, Western democracy was the universal panacea. For Russia, there was a widespread expectation and belief that it would develop a Western style democracy and a western style free market. Over the years, it has become clear that all that were mascara thoughts as we have witnessed the reassertion of Russian history, traditions, culture, and with that, the emergence of an ‘authoritarian’ state. Again, in Iraq, the world remembers in 2003 when the USA, in conjunction with Britain, illegally invaded the Arab country in the name of democracy. What happened to that democracy? Has it worked?
Certainly it has not!
China’s growth in the last 30 years is an extra-ordinary achievement for a country of 1.3 billion people who make up 20 percent of the current world population, and growing at 10 percent a year. In 1980, China’s economy was one-twentieth the size of the US economy, but now is over half the size of the US economy.
Since Mao Zedong’s death in 1976, six hundred million people have been taken out of poverty in China. This has been achieved in no Western style democracy, but by an extra-ordinary competent state.
Democracy is not universally appropriate and applicable in all countries regardless of history, culture and circumstances. It is not a one-size-fits-all. Above all, the “democracy fits all” mentality ignores the fundamental historical and cultural differences between the developed and the developing countries. In any democracy, the level of a country’s economic development is a critical issue. Remember, in the history of democratic development, not a single Western country was a democracy at the time of economic take-off.
South African born industrialist Ivor Ichikowitz last year expressed his views about what democracy is and spoke of models of democracy that nations have had since the end of WWII. In his view, the world order that emerged after 1945 where everyone was “one-for-all and all-for-one and once sense of democracy” does not work.
He said: “China must do what works for China, and Africa must do what works for Africa.”
Overtime, democracy the world over will grow in its own way, according to a country’s own history, culture and circumstances. Democracy will come in many different forms, shapes and sizes. Countries may learn from the west, but they will not be like the west.
For feedback: gnyikadzino@gmail.com
