Politics & economics?
After reading about Mexico, and the book's proposition that NAFTA (free trade) may have encouraged democratization, do you think there is a relationship between economic development and democracy? Keep in mind the experience of the ABC countries & Peru.
If you think there is a relationship, what does this say about Cuba (or other countries)?
If there is no relationship, why do you think that is?
6 Comments:
A clear connection can be made between economic development and democratization. The ABC countries seemed to make their greatest strides toward democracy in their post industrial revolution state. The trend toward democratization in economically developed states, as highlighted in the modernization theory, should be applied to Cuba. The embargo is clearly having no effect on the Cuban leadership. Given the evidence, a lift of the embargo on Cuba is the most logical solution to our problems with the country.
I do agree with the idea that trade and economic development can be linked with democratization. Much like what was posted previously, many of the countries that we have read about did make their greatest strides towards democracy after industrialization. Now this is where I disagree. Many of the countries that we have discussed were doing well economically before they industrialized. It was after industrialization that a need for different political representation arose . So in my opinion the need for democracy was not necessarily something that came willingly, but came more as a necessity after economic crisis needed to be addressed.
Secondly, many of the trade opportunities that were taken within many of the countries turned out to be the biggest part of their downfall. As foreign investors took hold of many products it forced the economy down, causing the need for new leaders to come into power. Chile and the copper industry is a prime example of this. Once they lost much of the power over the main industry, their economy took a dramatic turn. Or Peru and Guano, the country had a lucrative export but was unable to reap the benefits of it because foreign investors took up much of the profit.
So basically I can understand how it would seem logical to bombard Cuba with free trade in an attempt to help democracy take hold, but on the same note there is evidence for both sides that could refute or backup the idea.
Mexico definitely is a unique example of a Latin American country developing economically and then into a democracy. Negotiations with NAFTA from the Salinas administration preceding the free and fair election of Vicente Fox in 2000 can’t be a coincidence. The economic growth that spawns from free trade creates jobs which begin to grow the working and middle classes. Politicians begin to care what those classes are experiencing and where their votes will go. Also, the labor reforms with the new labor code Mexico agreed to follow entering into NAFTA empowers workers to get organized and seek to be heard politically.
Free trade with Cuba could very well bring down communism there. However, with people influenced by Castro’s charisma even with his death, if his brother for example where put in power communism is likely to continue regardless of free trade. Also, it would be a stretch for Cubans to go from the national pride Castro engrains in their minds to feeling dependent on foreign trade and investment.
I strongly agree with the idea that democracy and economy are related. If there is no free trade in the market system, then there is no 'democracy'. After all the whole idea of democracy comes down to freedom. As for the countries, some were able to get democracy because of industrialization. If industrialization did not take place (along with other factors), not many of the LA countries would see democracy emerge.
As of right now, there is no relationship between Cuba and US, if there was free trade then this MIGHT help somewhat however, as mentioned before too, as long as Castro is in power, even with his death, there will be many more Castronistas (is that what the followers of Castro call themselves?) and they will most likely continue with the communist system that they have.
This post has been removed by the author.
I don't think economic development has direct relationship to democracy. Well, most of developed countries in the world are democracy. But there are some countries growing very fast even they are not democracy. For example, China has one of the highest GDP growth rate in the world but yet they are not democratic country. They are getting closer and closer to free trade and free economy, and Chinese people are pretty satisfy with their national development, and not much conflict between government and citizen.
The other example will be Singapore. As everybody knows that singapore is very economically developed country, yet their administration is very stable and there was no election even when the prime minister was going change. In this situation, I think the extremely free trade in singapore let people focuses more on economy, not politics.
So, my opinion is that as long as economy is growing well, there will be few political change if there are few social and political conflict. No matter they are communism or democracy.
Post a Comment
<< Home