10
In line with Garrett’s argument,
Katzenstein (1985) maintains that it was precisely
the combination of domestic compensation with international openness that help the
small European countries enjoy high level of development during the Golden Age, and
gave the social democracy good electoral results (see, e.g., Einhorn and Logue 1989;
Przeworski and Sprague 1986).
However, most scholars supporting the proposition that globalization promotes
democracy argue that such an impact is through economic growth (see, e.g., Bollen and
Jackman 1995; Burkhart and Lewis-Beck 1994; Inglehart 1997; Lewis-Beck 1988; Lipset
1959; 1994; Londregan and Poole 1996; Muller 1997; Platner 1993; Schumpeter 1950),
4
international business (Bhagwati 1994; Schmitter 2001), dissemination of information
and contacts—NGOs—(Diamond 1992; Hanen 1990; Kummell 1998), encouraging
decentralization of power (Roberts 1996; Self 1993; Sheth 1995), promoting domestic
democratic institutions (Roberts 1996; Stark 1998), and bringing in democratic ideas
(Huntington 1993; Przeworski et al. 2000; Starr 1991; Whitehead 1986; 2001).
However, there are some other scholars who argue that globalization actually
obstruct democracy through: a) reducing state autonomy and forcing policies that please
foreign investors (Cammack 1998; Cox 1996; Diamond 1994; Gill 1995; Gray 1996;
Held 1991; Jones 1995; Lindblom 1977), b) hurting the poor and narrowing government
ability to compensate losers (Bryan and Farrell 1996; Cox 1996; Drucker 1994; Martin
and Schumann 1997; Moran 1996; Rodrick 1997), c) causing balance of payment crises
(Cammack 1998; Haggard and Kaufman 1995; O'Donnell 1994), and d) degrading the
concept of citizenship (Cox 1996).
4
The modernization theory in general supported the idea that modernization (higher levels of education, for
example) increases the possibility of democracy.
Convention