waves of democracy

Good outcomes can occur in authoritarian regimes, but the probabilities are lower compared to democratic ones.
Historically, most people have lived under authoritarian governments; democracy has only become more common in recent decades (last 30 years).
In the post-World War II period, the number of countries has greatly increased from fewer than 80 to close to 200.

A graph shows the increase in the number of democracies versus dictatorships since 1990—'89 to '91 is significant for democracy prevalence.
- 1990 marks the first point where democracies exceed authoritarian regimes.
This change largely resulted from former communist states in Central and Eastern Europe democratizing after the Cold War.

For a democracy to emerge, an authoritarian regime must collapse, but most transitions lead to new authoritarian forms.
- Example: Augusto Pinochet’s regime in Chile transitioned from a military junta to a personalistic dictatorship.

Economic Crisis: Failing economic policies lead people to revolt; however, this only explains military regimes.
- A graph illustrates regime failure probabilities tied to economic growth. Military regimes are more likely to collapse with a poor economy.
- Personalist and hegemonic parties exhibit a flat regime failure probability regardless of economic conditions.

Military regimes prioritize their institution's integrity, allowing them to retreat from power while preserving their existence.
Personalist regimes break down violently, hinging on the dictator's fate.
Hegemonic party regimes may transition more peacefully but still face constraints.
Examples include the PRI in Mexico and the KMT in Taiwan, where transitions to democracies involved dominant party elections.

Since the late 1980s, an increase in democracies has occurred across various regime types, especially following the Cold War.
Many authoritarian regimes transitioned to democracy as Cold War influences waned.

The relationship between economic growth and democratization is complex.
- Initial understanding suggested democracy correlates with wealth, but recent analyses indicate wealth may sustain democracy rather than cause it.
- Jaworski and Lamongji assert that while economic development does not cause democratization, it preserves existing democracies, with a significant threshold of $8,000 per capita income.
- Gupta and Stokes challenge this view, arguing that prior to 1950, economic growth correlated positively with democratization due to the absence of external economic/democratic influences (e.g., communism and oil exportation).

Elites may opt to democratize if:
- Inequality is lower, reducing fears of losing power.
- Capital is mobile, allowing rich elites to evade punitive taxations if they lose power.
- Regimes face credible threats of revolution or demand protests amidst crises.

International Factors: Post-colonial transitions often restructured governance.
- Conquests historically adjusted regimes; post-WWII constitutions in Germany and Japan imposed democratic structures.
- Some modern instances like Iraq and Afghanistan showcase failed democratization attempts following military interventions.
- The diffusion theory posits that neighboring democracies can influence and promote democratization in adjacent states.

The pathway from authoritarianism to democracy is complex, with revolutions being rare occurrences. Understanding historical and economic contexts is essential for grasping these political dynamics.