Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Democratization, Liberalization, and Pacification

  • Chapter
Liberal Democracy and Peace in South Africa

  • 147 Accesses

Abstract

The “most important fact of our time,” according to R.J. Rummel writing in 1997, is the recognition that democracy is “a method of non-violence.” By this is understood that “liberal democracies do not make war on each other… that the more two nations are democratic, the less violence between them… that the more democracy, the less collective domestic violence, such as riots, rebellions, guerrilla warfare, and the like… that the more democracy, the less democide (genocide and mass murder).”1

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. R.J. Rummel, Power Kills. Democracy as a method of nonviolence (New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers, 1997), 23.

    Google Scholar 

  2. For general critical overviews of findings and summaries of both agreements and points of disagreement among scholars in this field, see James Lee Ray, Democracy and International Conflict. An Evaluation of the Democratic Peace Proposition (Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina Press, 1995).

    Google Scholar 

  3. See also Steve Chan, “In Search of Democratic Peace: Problems and Promise,” Mershon International Studies Review 41 (1997): 59–91;

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. James Lee Ray, “Does Democracy Cause Peace?,” Annual Review of Political Science 1 (1998): 27–46; and

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. James Lee Ray, “The Democratic Path to Peace,” Journal of Democracy 8, 2 (April 1997): 49–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Fred Chernoff, “The Study of Democratic Peace and Progress in International Relations,” International Studies Review 6 (2004): 49–77;

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Nils Peter Gleditsch, “Democracy and Peace,” Journal of Peace Research 29, 4 (1992): 369–376.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Bruce Russett, Grasping the Democratic Peace. Principles for a Post-Cold War World (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1993), ch. 4, 72–98.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Bruce Russett and John ONeal, Triangulating Peace. Democracy, Interdependence and International Organisations (New York: W.W. Norton, 2001), 93.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Matthew Krain and Marissa Edson Myers, “Democracy and Civil War: A Note on the Democratic Peace Proposition,” International Interactions 23, 1 (1997): 109–118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Errol A. Henderson and J. David Singer, “Civil War in the Post-Colonial World, 1946–92,” Journal of Peace Research 37, 3 (2000): 275–299.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. For a list of such wars up to 1986, see Michael W. Doyle, “Liberalism and World Politics,” American Political Science Review 80, 4 (December 1986): 1151–1169, 1165, 1166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Hans Reis (ed.), Kant’s Political Writings trans. H.B. Nisbet (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1970).

    Google Scholar 

  14. Other authoritative measures are the Polity IV set of indicators developed by Ted Robert Gurr and colleagues, the data set established by Tatu Vanhanen, and the measures developed by Przeworski, Alvarez, Cheibub, and Limongi. All four of these data sets are compared and analyzed in Pippa Norris, Driving Democracy, Do Power-Sharing Institutions Work? (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2008).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  15. Arch Puddington, “The 2008 Freedom House Survey: A Third Year of Decline,” Journal of Democracy 20, 3 (April 2009): 93–107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. John M. Owen, “How Liberalism Produces Democratic Peace,” International Security 19, 2 (1984): 87–125; Doyle, “Liberalism and World Politics”; Rummel, Power Kills 137–152; Russett, Grasping the Democratic Peace 30–41, 80–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Russett, Grasping the Democratic Peace 31. The logic underlying cooperation by free agents over conflict and confrontation is spelt out in the work of Robert Axelrod on the iterated prisoner’s Dilemma, The Evolution of Co-operation (New York: Basic Books, 1984).

    Google Scholar 

  18. See also Matt Ridley, The Origins of Virtue: Human Instincts and the Evolution of Co-operation (New York: Viking, 1996). For the construction of institutions of cooperation in such conditions,

    Google Scholar 

  19. see Elinor Ostrom, Governing the Commons, The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  20. Robert Dahl Polyarchy. Participation and Opposition (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1971), 37.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Azar Gat, War in Human Civilization (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006), ch. 16, 587–609.

    Google Scholar 

  22. On the importance of levels of development for the liberal peace, see also Havard Hegre, “Development and the Liberal Peace: What Does it Take to be a Trading State?,” Journal of Peace Research 37, 1 (2000). 5–30;

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Michael Mousseau, “Market Prosperity, Democratic Consolidation, and the Democratic Peace,” Journal of Conflict Resolution 44, 4 (August 2000): 472– 507; Michael Mousseau, Havard Hegre, and John ONeal, “How the Wealth of Nations Conditions the Liberal Peace,” European Journal of International Relations 9, 2 (2003): 277–314.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Martin van Creveld, The Transformation of War (New York: The Free Press, 1991), 87.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Ronald Inglehart and Wayne E. Baker, “Modernization, Cultural Change, and the Persistence of Traditional Values,” American Sociological Review 65 (February 2000): 19–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Martin van Creveld, The Culture of War (New York: Balantine books, 2008).

    Google Scholar 

  27. It has been argued that the very presence of large numbers of such “surplus” males within the populations of China and India holds significant implications for international security and domestic stability in these countries, with implications for the expansion of the liberal democratic zone of peace. See Valerie M. Hudson and Andrea M. den Boer, Bare Branches. The Security Implications of Asia’s Surplus Male Population (London: The MIT Press, 2005).

    Google Scholar 

  28. Samuel P. Huntington, The Third Wave. Democratization in the Late Twentieth Century (Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma Press, 1991), 3, 4.

    Google Scholar 

  29. This perspective has yielded a large body of important theoretical and empirical findings, much of policy relevance, derived from comparative studies of peace processes. See Peter Harris and Ben Reilly (eds.), Democracy and Deep-Rooted Conflict: Options for Negotiators (Stockholm: International Idea, 1998);.

    Google Scholar 

  30. John Darby and Roger Mac Ginty (eds.), Contemporary Peacemaking, Conflict, Peace Processes and Post-War Reconstruction (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2008) second edition;

    Google Scholar 

  31. H. Miall, O. Ramsbottom, and T. Woodhouse, Contemporary Conflict Resolution (Cambridge: Polity Press, 2005)

    Google Scholar 

  32. Some of the standard works in this very large field are by Arend Lijphart, The Politics of Accommodation (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1968);

    Google Scholar 

  33. Arend Lijphart, Democracy in Plural Societies. A Comparative Exploration (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1977);

    Google Scholar 

  34. Donald L. Horowitz, Ethnic Groups in Conflict (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1985);

    Google Scholar 

  35. Timothy D. Sisk, Power-Sharing and International mediation in Ethnic Conflicts (Washington DC: United States Institute of Peace Press, 1996);

    Google Scholar 

  36. Andrew Reynolds (ed.), The Architecture of Democracy. Constitutional Design, Conflict Management and Democracy (New York: Oxford University Press, 2002);

    Google Scholar 

  37. Sid Noel (ed.) From Power-Sharing to Democracy. Post-Conflict Institutions in Ethnically Divided Societies (Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press, 2005); Pippa Norris, Driving Democracy. Do Power-Sharing Institutions Work?

    Google Scholar 

  38. Arguably the most influential in this regard were the analyses collected in the volume edited by Guillermo O’Donnell, Phillipe C. Schmitter, and Laurence Whitehead, Transitions from Authoritarian Rule. Prospects for Democracy (London: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1986).

    Google Scholar 

  39. One of the earliest and influential presentations of the importance of processes of transition is by Dankwart A. Rustow, “Transitions to Democracy: Toward a Dynamic Model,” Comparative Politics! 3 (April 1970): 337–363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Phillipe C. Schmitter, “The Proto-Science of Consolidology; Can it Improve the Outcome of Contemporary Efforts at Democratization?,” Politikon, South African Journal of Political Studies 21, 2 (December 1994): 15–27, 24, 25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Roger Mac Ginty, No War, No Peace. The Rejuvenation of Stalled Peace Processes and Peace Accords (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2006), 43. Mac Ginty’s book takes a highly critical look at this proposition.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Boutros Boutros-Ghali, An Agenda for Peace. Preventive Diplomacy, Peacemaking and Peace-keeping, New York: United Nations, January 31, 1992, Para. 59.

    Google Scholar 

  43. A summary of UN peace operations can be found in Paul F. Diehl, Peace Operations (Cambridge: Polity Press, 2008). See also Russett and ONeal, Triangulating Peace 200–211.

    Google Scholar 

  44. For critical accounts, see the work of Mac Ginty, No War, No Peace; Mac Ginty and Richmond (eds.), The liberal Peace and Post-War Reconstruction, Myth or Reality (New York: Routledge, 2009).

    Google Scholar 

  45. See also Tarak Barkawi and Mark Laffey (eds.), Democracy, liberalism and War, Rethinking the Democratic Peace Debate (Boulder: Lynne Rienner, 2001).

    Google Scholar 

  46. Influential in this regard are Roland Paris, At War’s End, Building Peace After Civil Conflict (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2004);

    Book  Google Scholar 

  47. Roland Paris and Timothy D. Sisk (eds.), The Dilemmas of State building. Confronting the Contradictions of Postwar Peace Operations (New York: Routledge, 2009).

    Google Scholar 

  48. Leo Kuper, “Plural Societies; Perspectives and Problems,” in Leo Kuper and M.G. Smith, (eds.), Pluralism in Africa (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1969), 12.

    Google Scholar 

  49. M.G. Smith, The Plural Society in the British West Indies (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1965), 81, 82.

    Google Scholar 

  50. S.P. Huntington, 1993 “The Clash of Civilizations?,” Foreign Affairs (summer 1993): 22–49;

    Google Scholar 

  51. Huntington, S.P. The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order (New York: Touchstone, 1996).

    Google Scholar 

  52. Henry Tajfel and John Turner, “An Integrative Theory of Intergroup Conflict,” in William G. Austin and Stephen Worchel (eds.), The Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations (Monterey: Wadsworth, 1979), 40.

    Google Scholar 

  53. Jeff Greenberg, Sheldon Solomon, Tom Pyszcynski, Abraham Rosenblatt, John Burling, Deborah Lyon, Linda Simon, and Elizabeth Pinel, “Why do People Need Self-Esteem? Converging Evidence that Self-Esteem Serves as an Anxiety-Buffering Function,” in Baumeister, Roy, F. (ed.), The Self in Social Psychology (Philadelphia: Taylor and Francis, 1999), 105–122, 106.

    Google Scholar 

  54. Sheldon Solomon, Jeff Greenberg, and Tom Pyszczynski, “A Terror Management Theory of Social Behavior: The Psychological Functions of Self-Esteem and Cultural Worldviews,” in Marc P. Zanna (ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology Vol. 24 (New York: Academic Press, 1991), 93–159.

    Google Scholar 

  55. Peter L. Berger, “On the Obsolescence of the Concept of Honour,” in Peter L. Berger, Brigitte Berger, and Hansfried Kellner (eds.), The Homeless Mind – Modernization and Consciousness (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1974), 78–89.

    Google Scholar 

  56. Robert Dahl, Political Oppositions in Western Democracies (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1966), 48–59. See also Lijphart, Democracy in Plural Societies 71–81.

    Google Scholar 

  57. Amy Chua, World on Fire. How Exporting Free Market Democracy Breeds Ethnic Hatred and Global Instability (New York: Random House, 2004), 4.

    Google Scholar 

  58. Larry Diamond, “Is The Third Wave Over?” Journal of Democracy 7, 3 (1996): 20–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Fareed Zakaria, “The Rise of Illiberal Democracy,” Foreign Affairs (November/December 1997): 22–43;

    Google Scholar 

  60. Fareed Zakaria, The Future of Freedom. Illiberal Democracy at Home and Abroad (New York: W.W. Norton, 2004).

    Google Scholar 

  61. Adrian Karatnycky, “The 1998 Freedom House Surveys: The Decline of Illiberal Democracy,” Journal of Democracy 10, 1 (1999): 112–125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Larry Diamond, “Elections Without Democracy: Thinking about Hybrid Regimes,” Journal of Democracy 13, 2 (April 2002): 21–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. S. Levitsky and Lucan A. Way, “The Rise of Competitive Authoritarianism,” Journal of Democracy 13, 2 (April 2002): 51–65;

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Andreas Schedler, “The Menu of Manipulation,” Journal of Democracy 13, 2 (April 2002): 36–50;

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Nicolas van de Walle, “Africa’s Range of Regimes,” Journal of Democracy 13, 2 (April 2002): 66–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Thomas Carothers, “The End of the Transition Paradigm,” Journal of Democracy 13, 1 (January 2002): 5–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Arch Puddington, “The 2007 Freedom House Survey: Is the Tide Turning?,” Journal of Democracy 19, 2 (April 2008): 61–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. See also Charles Tilly, Democracy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007), 133–137.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  69. Pierre Hassner, “Russia’s Transition to Autocracy,” Journal of Democracy 19, 2 (April 2008): 5–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors
  1. Pierre du Toit
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Hennie Kotzé
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Copyright information

© 2011 Pierre du Toit and Hennie Kotzé

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

du Toit, P., Kotzé, H. (2011). Democratization, Liberalization, and Pacification. In: Liberal Democracy and Peace in South Africa. Palgrave Macmillan, New York. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230116320_2

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation