Tue, Feb 18, 2014 - Page 9 News List

Asia’s lengthy dance with democracy not about West’s influence

The drama of South and East Asia’s progress toward a democratic peace and prosperity shaped by local needs and intermingled histories fits historical models

By Jean-Pierre Lehmann

Asia’s political spectrum ranges from the brutal despotism of North Korea to the enlightened constitutional monarchy of Bhutan (so enlightened that it developed Gross National Happiness as an alternative measure to GDP), with many shades in between. However, the old charge that Asia is ill-suited for Western-style democracy is being leveled again. Are the skeptics right?

In South and East Asia, democracies outnumber dictatorships by 17 to six. However, democracies face turbulent times. Thailand’s political impasse, amid massive anti-democracy demonstrations, has hit world headlines and elections have also been violently contested in Bangladesh. There have been widespread human rights abuses in Sri Lanka. Cambodians have suffered a brutal political clampdown. And political life in the world’s largest democracy, India, is raucous and unruly.

Nonetheless, the notion of democratic exclusivity is both wrong and historically short-sighted. Although almost all Western countries are currently democracies, this has only been the case since the 1990s. Just a half-century earlier, you could count the number of Western democracies on your fingers. And even these were imperfect: Using the most basic democratic yardstick — universal suffrage — the US could not be seen as truly democratic until the civil rights victories of the 1960s.

Although Britain was a beacon of democracy in the 20th century, it did not extend this principle to an empire that held sway over more people and territory than any previous world power. It suppressed independence movements in India and across the Middle East and Africa (though many of these movements’ members willingly fought for Britain during both world wars).

Similarly, the Dutch did not extend their democracy to Indonesia. Nor did France support free and fair elections in Indochina, or in its Middle Eastern and African colonies. The Belgians were particularly brutal in the Congo. The Spanish and Portuguese ravaged Latin America. And the Germans were not much better in Southwest Africa. Indeed, two of history’s most terrifying ideologies, fascism and communism, were devised and embraced in continental Europe.


The fact that the word “democracy” derives from ancient Greek and that one can discern the kernel of democratic thought in Greek philosophy, by no means implies that democracy is embedded in the West’s political DNA. Only after centuries of absolutist rule, extremism, war, revolution and oppression can the West as a whole reasonably claim to be free, democratic, peaceful and prosperous — and even now there are exceptions. It is also debatable whether this so-called Western democracy was a cause or a consequence of peace and prosperity.

The West was not always the world’s most politically advanced region. When Jesuit missionaries came to China in the 17th century, they enthused about how much Europeans could learn from the country’s enlightened political philosophy, Confucianism. The Enlightenment philosophers Voltaire and Immanuel Kant did just that.

Confucian concepts such as the “mandate of heaven” seemed infinitely more just than that of Europe’s “divine right of kings.” Nobel Prize in Economics laureate Amartya Sen traces the origins of Indian democratic dialogue to the third-century BC Buddhist Indian Emperor Ashoka. He also contrasts the religious tolerance preached and practiced by the Muslim Indian Emperor Akbar in the 1590s with the Inquisition, which was hounding heretics in Europe at about the same time.

This story has been viewed 2227 times.

Comments will be moderated. Remarks containing abusive and obscene language, personal attacks of any kind or promotion will be removed and the user banned.

TOP top