In contrast, in the United States of America (USA), which has been the model of democracy, the winner takes it all. It never used to be that way, Robert Kaplan, a prominent American political analyst, explains in a podcast. The US founding fathers, like James Madison, feared pure democracy. Instead, they favored a republic where “the elites decide, but the people get to change the elites every four years. For decades, the party leaders made decisions in secret, smoke-filled rooms about who would run for president.
Adding that “though that was undemocratic and sleazy, it worked very well, he concluded. And so now we have a pure democracy with primaries for each state, which means that the most extreme person wins essentially because primaries draw out the most extreme voters. And so instead of elites deciding the two candidates, we have pure democracy deciding it, and the result has been worse.”
Every political system faces significant challenges, and history offers numerous examples of the severe consequences of political instability. The fall of the Ottoman Empire is a stark reminder of how internal strife, external pressures, and the failure to adapt to changing circumstances can lead to the collapse of even the most enduring empires. This historical lesson resonates today as many analysts and commentators speculate about the potential decline of the US as a global power.
The current political landscape in the US, marked by increasing polarization and the rise of populism, has led some to predict the end of what is often termed the “American empire.” The deepening divisions within the country, coupled with challenges in maintaining global influence, have raised concerns about the sustainability of its political and economic systems. The comparison to the Ottoman Empire underscores the idea that no nation is immune to the forces of change and that the stability of any political system requires continuous adaptation and a commitment to inclusivity.
These challenges also face many emerging economies that copy the US system, sometimes leading to conflicts. In Africa, for example, democracy has exacerbated inequality. Introducing democratic processes has often highlighted and deepened existing social and economic divides, with political power frequently captured by elites who use it to entrench their interests.
Rather than ensuring fair representation and the equitable distribution of resources, democratic transitions have sometimes led to increased corruption and patronage politics. This has resulted in significant unrest and, in some cases, violent conflict as disenfranchised groups struggle for a voice and share in the nation’s wealth.
The complexities of implementing democracy in a context of vast historical, ethnic, and economic disparities cannot be overstated. While the principles of democracy offer a path to stable governance and development, the practical realities in many African nations reveal a more challenging journey. Without robust institutions and a commitment to inclusivity and justice, democracy can paradoxically fuel the inequalities it seeks to remedy.
This is what makes the Belgian form of democracy ideal in multiethnic countries. By ensuring that every political party is included in the negotiations, Belgium provides a model of inclusive governance that helps to maintain stability in a diverse society. This power-sharing method reduces the risk of any single group dominating the political landscape, fostering a sense of fairness and cooperation among the various ethnic and political factions.
Moreover, the lengthy negotiation period allows for thorough dialogue and compromise, ensuring that all voices are heard and considered in the formation of the government. This approach can serve as a valuable blueprint for other multiethnic nations seeking to balance representation with stability.
The implications of Trump’s presidency for the developing world are vast and varied, influencing everything from governance practices to human rights and international relations. His second term tenure heralds a significant shift in US foreign policy, characterized by a more transactional approach to global affairs, often prioritizing bilateral deals over multilateral cooperation.
Regarding governance practices, Trump’s “America First” rhetoric and open disdain for traditional diplomatic norms could embolden several authoritarian leaders worldwide. His apparent disregard for democratic principles, such as freedom of the press and judicial independence, provides tacit approval for leaders in developing countries to undermine democratic institutions and processes. This will undoubtedly lead to increased authoritarianism and erosion of democratic norms in various regions.
In addition, human rights would also be impacted during Trump’s presidency. His administration’s policies on immigration and refugee intake, coupled with a perceived lack of commitment to human rights advocacy, may weaken the global human rights agenda. For developing countries, this means reduced pressure and accountability from a historically vocal proponent of human rights, potentially leading to increased violations with fewer repercussions on the international stage.
Moreover, Trump’s approach to international relations, characterized by a retreat from global leadership and skepticism towards international organizations, will have significant ramifications for the developing world. The withdrawal from key agreements, such as the Paris Climate Accord, and reduced funding for international development programs create gaps that would adversely affect global cooperation on critical issues like climate change, poverty alleviation, and public health.
These shifts leave many developing nations navigating a more uncertain and fragmented global landscape, where traditional alliances are being redefined, and the balance of power is in flux. The need for robust, adaptive, and inclusive governance systems has never been more apparent as these countries strive to achieve stability and sustainable development amidst the evolving international order.
While democracy promises stable governance and development, its implementation requires careful consideration of historical, ethnic, and economic contexts. Like that in Belgium, inclusive governance may provide a blueprint for achieving balance and stability in diverse societies. The evolving global landscape demands adaptive governance systems for sustainable development and stability.
By Amb – Prof Bitange Ndemo
