Do We Really Want Democracy?

It has become common for people all around the world to speak of the term “democracy” as a glorious and highly sought after thing that will bring peace and freedom to everyone it encounters. America especially, has become increasingly adamant about the need to spread democracy abroad to everywhere that does not yet have it and has not been graced by its presence. Democracy is held in the highest esteem, and is generally believed to be the best and most ideal form of government for any and every country.
But are we right in jumping to the conclusion that democracy is right for everyone? Is it true that democracy is, in fact, the best form of government?
There is good reason to believe that we are not and that democracy may not be the best type of government for every country.
Democracy, like any other type of government, does not come without flaws. There has developed a tendency to pile up numerous expectations on the democratic form of government, many of which are not always met. Schmitter and Karl’s article “What Democracy Is…And Is Not” mentions these prospects for democracies that are not always fulfilled. These include the fact that democracies are not always more economically efficient than other forms of government. It is simply not feasible for people to expect new democracies to immediately be much more economically efficient than their previous form of government. Not only may democracies be less economically efficient, but also with regards to the administrative efficiency and implementation of policies. Democracies may very well prove to be slower and less efficient than other forms of government when making decisions, because more people must be included in decision-making, meaning more compromises must be made which may in turn lead to increased dissatisfaction with the outcome. In addition, democracies may not be more orderly or stable than the governments they take the place of because there will be more disagreement among officials.
Bearing these ideas in mind, should we still push for the democratization of countries who have not yet done so? Democracy is the messiest of all regimes and, since it may not bring a more effective or efficient government, may not improve the economy, and undoubtedly will not please everyone, is it really worth trying for every country?
Many people praise democracy for its ability to bring about peace and social justice and freedoms, but is it really democracy that does this?
People today bolster the idea of democracy in believing that a democratic system entails a protection of basic liberties, rule of law, separation of powers, etc. Yet just because these ideas are associated with democracy, does not mean that they are actually a part of what it means to be a democracy. In fact, as Fareed Zakaria argues, these freedoms are “theoretically different and historically distinct from democracy.” People need to stop making the mistake of believing that if a country becomes a democracy, all of its citizens will enjoy the social, political, economic and religious rights and freedoms that we associate with the United States government. Democracy itself is separate from constitutional liberalism. Because western governments have both democracy and constitutional liberalism in their systems, people incorrectly assume that the two automatically come as a pair, or that both are embodied in the term “democracy.” Democracy may not bring about constitutional liberalism, and while I applaud people for wanting those types of freedoms that come with constitutional liberalism, it is simply not correct and not realistic to think that they will appear in all countries that attempt to become democratic. People need to hesitate before jumping to the conclusion that democracy is the cure-all for any country with an unstable government, because it may not transform the country into the highly idealized form of government that people hope for it to be.