Authoritarian Rule and Democracy in Africa: A Theoretical Discourse

More documents

Recommendations

Info

I group A, B and C as models of economic expansion; and D, E and F as models of economiccrisis. Models of expansion do not rule out possibilities of crisis. In fact, crisis is embedded inall the models, given the problems usually associated with markets, state interventions andmixed systems of accumulation. I do not discuss specific cyclical crisis situations. A model ofexpansion in this context represents positive structural transformations, and a model of crisisis associated with negative structural changes. The two deal with development processes thatlead to qualitative changes in forms of accumulation. In this context negative structuralchanges can experience periods of positive growth. These models are illustrated in thefollowing scale:+3 +2 +1 0 -1 -2 -3A B C D E FThe focus on forms of accumulation in constructing the models obviously downplays othercrucial variables like resource endowment and class structure – some would say it leaves themout completely. The theoretical focus is, of course, to establish a linkage between forms ofaccumulation and political systems that can be classified as either democratic or authoritarian.In any case, some of the other variables, though not explicitly treated, could be deduced fromthe six models which, in a way, give us some idea of different patterns and levels ofdevelopment. I relate changes in forms of accumulation to questions of rural-urbanintegration, the nature of system-maintenance social contracts, the provision of publicwelfare, and the dynamics of state-civil society relations. These represent the crucial factors inestablishing whether African countries can experience authoritarian or democratic rule. Imake no attempt, however, to develop quantifiable variables around these issues. I highlightthe qualitative links between these issues and authoritarianism/democracy in Table 2.Table 2Forms of accumulation and socio-political systemsForms ofaccumulationRural-urbanintegrationWelfareSocialsystemA very high very high social contract(corporate)State/civilsocietyautonomouscivil societyB moderate moderate/high patron-client regulatedcivil societyC moderate high social contract(controlled)/patron-clientD low low collapsingsocialcontract/resurgence ofkinship tiesand selfinterestEFlow/extremedualismcollapsedmoderneconomyvery lowcollectivekinship familywelfarecollapsedsocial contractfragmentedkinship tiesstate/partcontrol of civilsocietyintensepressures forautonomy ofcivil societyintensepressures forautonomy ofcivil societyfusion of stateand civilsocietyPotentialpoliticalsystemliberaldemocracyclientelistdemocracyauthoritarianauthoritarianauthoritarianauthoritarian/informaldemocracyThe peasant question, which is at the heart of rural-urban integration, is central to anydiscussion of democracy in Africa since most people live in rural areas and depend on10
agriculture for their main source of livelihood. Rural populations are the major source ofnational food supplies, export revenues and industrial development (Barraclough, 1990;Mamdani, 1986 and 1987). By rural-urban integration, I understand the process of sustainingthe economic, social and political life of rural communities, leading to a transformation of thestructures of dualism that have underpinned all facets of rural-urban relations. Low levels ofnational integration restrict democratization to an urban phenomenon, relegate peasants to thefringes of civil society, and undermines their ability to develop national strategies and enterinto broad democratic coalitions.The alienation of rural societies from the mainstream of national life exposes the peasantry tocontinued manipulation from state authorities and rural/urban patrons, anxious to maintainauthoritarian forms of rule. Solving the rural-urban dilemma may, in fact, provide the basisfor coming to terms with the problems of unbalanced ethnic and regional development. Theresolution of this dilemma should obviously give prominence to the transformation of theregulatory mechanisms that have undermined the independence of petty producers, andprovide support for the dynamics of petty accumulation. This boils down to a question ofmaking economic development and democracy national projects, as opposed to the currentpractice where they are mainly an urban phenomenon dominated by the power élites. Table 2shows how this issue is related to the six different models of accumulation.A stable and sustainable democracy must also be able to create a social system that willaccommodate the conflicting claims of diverse groups in society. The social groups remaincommitted to the fundamentals of the existing order while competing, sometimes militantly,for overall dominance. Classical liberalism relies on the depoliticizing functions of the marketas the bedrock for the construction of such a stable social order. The hegemony of thecapitalist class is presented as anonymous and the losses inflicted by the market ondisadvantaged groups is interpreted as a natural fate which can befall all individuals(Lawrence, 1989). In this context, liberals see democracy as the natural political shell ofcapitalism.There is, however, no natural correspondence between capitalism and democracy (Therbon,1977). All capitalist economies, however advanced, must devise social systems that willsustain democratic rule. Such systems must provide welfare/economic support, howevercontestable, for the deprived majority to exercise their formal democratic rights, which in turnshould allow them to sustain and develop their livelihood aspirations. Western democracieswere consolidated in the post-1945 period with the construction of welfare states. Socialdemocratic parties provided political leadership to restless workers and deprived groups tousher in the so-called “historic class compromise”. Social democracy has strong built-inelements of corporatism as governments try to balance the conflicting demands of unions andthe organized private sector. The leading actors and their organizations bargain with the stateas independent entities but their co-optation into the policy apparatus entails majorcompromises, including the regulation of the behaviour of their members (Cawson, 1989;Carter, 1989).The corporate type of social control is contrasted with social contracts in which the rulingauthorities define the rules and regulate the participation of the other contestants. Invariablythe contending social actors are denied autonomous political space to canvass for the viewsand interests of their members. The social contract is top-down and authoritarian. Despite itsauthoritarian character, its legitimacy may rest on relatively high levels of welfare. The levelof this type of welfare may be lower than the corporate type because of the low level ofdevelopment and the political constraints imposed on the bargaining positions of social actors.Another type of social control is patron-client arrangements which can operate in both formaldemocracies and authoritarian systems. Where patron-client relations sustain democratic rule,the contending groups and their organizations may enjoy formal autonomy, but the political11
Page 1 and 2: The United Nations Research Institu
Page 3: Authoritarian Rule and Democracy in
Page 7 and 8: of working conditions. Industrial d
Page 9 and 10: themselves at the level of civil so
Page 11: 1.6 Structural pre-conditions for s
Page 15 and 16: to oil its patronage machine and go
Page 17 and 18: absolutism of colonial rule by open
Page 19 and 20: uilding and economic development. I
Page 21 and 22: Table 4Central government expenditu
Page 23 and 24: 3. Authoritarian Democratization: T
Page 25 and 26: the diplomatic service and appointe
Page 27 and 28: concepts in order to be able to ask
Page 29 and 30: government. Although they subsequen
Page 31 and 32: formulation of the problem, in whic
Page 33 and 34: AKUT conference “When Does Democr
Page 35 and 36: IMF Survey, June 1988, Washington,
Page 37 and 38: The Multinational Corporation and I

Authoritarian Rule and Democracy in Africa: A Theoretical Discourse

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?