Skip to main content

The Concentric Circles of Democratization: Teasing Out the Common Drivers

  • Chapter
  • 110 Accesses

Abstract

The Stoic philosophers of the fourth century BC believed in the idea of oikeiosis. Oikeiosis proposed to gradually expand one’s closest attachments to oneself on to the family, society and eventually all of humanity. The early Stoic philosopher Hierocles depicted the idea of oikeiosis through his concentric circles of identity: the innermost circle represented the individual; the surrounding circles stood for immediate family, extended family, local group, citizens, countrymen and humanity, in this order. The objective of oikeiosis was to draw in people from the outer circles into the inner ones, based on the assumption that all human beings belong to one single and universal community with a shared morality at the core. As such, oikeiosis became the basis of cosmopolitan ethics.1

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

Buying options

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

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. Terry Karl coined the term “fallacy of electoralism” to refer to the inadequacy of equating democratization with elections alone (Karl 2000, Carothers 2002, Diamond 2002). Committing the fallacy was about adopting an excessively minimalist definition of democracy in which accountability, the broadest meaning of representative democracy according to Schmitter (2004: 47), was relegated to elections. The fallacy instigated numerous and broader definitions and measurements of democracies and democratization (Schmitter and Karl 1991, Munck and Verkuilen 2002). It also led to the distinction between an electoral and a liberal democracy. The latter refused considering systems with enclaves of authoritarianism as democratic even though the overall system was based on fair, free and competitive elections, legitimate constitutions and effective multiparties. It required extended legal and political rights for citizens, and strengthened horizontal accountability among governing institutions (R. A. Dahl et al., The Democracy Sourcebook, Boston: The MIT Press, 2003. Available at http://downloads.pavroz.ru/files/democracysourcebook.pdf).

    Google Scholar 

  2. R. O. Keohane et al., “Democracy-Enhancing Multilateralism.” International Organization 63 (Winter 2009): 1–31. Available at https://www.princeton.edu/~rkeohane/publications/DEMfinal.pdf

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. R. Dominguez, “Diffusion of EU Norms in Latin America: The Cases of Mexico, Venezuela and Honduras,” Jean Monnet/Robert Schuman paper series 10, 1 (February 2010), Miami: Florida European Center. Available at http://aei.pitt.edu/15000/1/DominguezEU_LatinAmNormDiffFeb10Edi.pdf

    Google Scholar 

  4. F. Decker and J. Sonnicksen, The Direct Election of the Commission President: A Presidentialist Approach to Democratizing the European Union, Bonn: Center for European Integration Studies, 2009. Available at http://www.zei.uni-bonn.de/dateien/discussion-paper/dp_c192_ Decker_Sonnicksen.pdf

    Google Scholar 

  5. P. Y. Lipscy, “Democracy and Financial Crisis,” Paper Presented at the Annual Meeting of the International Political Economy Society, Stanford University, California, November 12, 2011. Available at http://www.stanford.edu/~plipscy/democracycrisis.pdf

    Google Scholar 

  6. J. Granato, “Cultural Values, Stable Democracy and Economic Development: A Reply.” American Journal of Political Science 40, 3 (August 1996): 680–696. Available at http://www.class.uh.edu/hcpp/jimgranato/CulturalValuesStableDemocracyAndEconomicDevelopment.pdf

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. R. V. Jackman and R. Miller, “A Renaissance of Political Culture?” University of Nebraska-Lincoln Political Science Publications 50, 1996. Available at http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1050&context=poliscifacpub

    Google Scholar 

  8. M. Helbling, “Nationalism and Democracy: Competing or Complementary Logics?” Living Reviews in Democracy 1, (2009): 1–14. Available at http://democracy.livingreviews.org/index.php/lrd/article/view/lrd-2009-7

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Copyright information

© 2014 Peride K. Blind

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Blind, P.K. (2014). The Concentric Circles of Democratization: Teasing Out the Common Drivers. In: Policy-Driven Democratization. Palgrave Macmillan, New York. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137294784_2

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics