Challenging Democratic Frameworks: A Critical Look at Berman's Lessons from Europe
Written by Madeline G. Schulz; Edited by Andrew Ma
Published on May 12th, 2025
Much of the world can collectively agree that the solution for peaceful governance, one that upholds the rights of the people, lies in the development of democratic governments. However differing opinions arise when it comes to approaching the formation of new democracies. In "How Democracies Emerge: Lessons from Europe," Sheri Berman argues that governments should take context-specific steps to build democracy, rather than relying on a rigid political model. She challenges both the pre-conditionalist and universalist views defined respectively by strict parameters of development, and multi-circumstantial possibilities given economic development, education, or civil society growth. Berman asserts that neither view fully captures democratic development, as both limit a progressing government’s potential, using the United Kingdom and the French Revolution to illustrate her point.
While England’s gradual democratic development follows a pre-conditionalist model, it cannot be applied to other cases. Many Eastern and Southern European countries, such as Poland, initiated democratic growth after the fall of communism, proving the pre-conditionalist view inadequate. Similarly, France’s abrupt shift to authoritarianism after violent upheaval challenges universalism. Berman concludes that democracy must be developed case by case, with a focus on each state's unique history and culture. Applying rigid models could push nations toward authoritarianism or democratic backsliding as democracy cannot be achieved through one-size-fits-all approaches.
Moving forward, Berman’s analysis of democratic evolution should inform policymaking, as leadership can better develop democracy by acknowledging each state’s history. While a democratic model may have been applicable in the past, the shift to a post Cold War and post colonial world must lead to the acknowledgment of a historically complex global past. Third wave countries in particular face deeper rooted inabilities to become democratic as imperialism weakened economies to the extent they are unable to engage in effective trade without the involvement of another party going forward. This then loosens the state’s concept of sovereignty and creates an interdependence on Western democracies without being able to politically progress themselves. This occurrence is highly prevalent in regions of Sub-saharan Africa, and throughout Eastern Europe.
This principle is also highly relevant in former Soviet-occupied states like Poland and Ukraine, which, from the European Union's perspective, face significant challenges in gaining full democratic recognition due to their distinct historical contexts. Following a traditional democratic development model in these cases greatly excludes countries that faced intensified control from other nations. This is then why leadership faces active concerns with erosion of democracy and a decay in political activism. Generally economies or political systems in third and second wave states are so weakened through conflict or occupation that a stand alone democracy becomes inefficient and incomparable to those of the West. Moving forward a novel approach to democratization would include an assessment of the country’s current economic standing, defining cultural significance, honoring past history, and acknowledging existing regimes. In this regard Sheri Berman’s words hold a great relevance to modern day society, as without doing so the gradual movement towards a well working democracy becomes inconceivable.
