HPAS 2023 Mains GS-1 Question 8
Development and democracy are like twins. Critically examine this statement.
Solution:
The statement “Development and democracy are like twins” suggests they are intrinsically linked, mutually reinforcing, and ideally grow together. “Development” here implies holistic human development (health, education, standard of living) and not just economic growth (GDP). “Democracy” refers to a system of governance based on public participation, accountability, and human rights.
A critical examination requires analyzing both the symbiotic relationship (supporting the “twins” theory) and the conflicts or divergences between them.
Arguments for the “Twins” (Synergistic Relationship)
- Accountability and Good Governance: Democratic institutions (free press, independent judiciary, opposition parties) hold governments accountable. This transparency reduces corruption and ensures that state resources are allocated efficiently towards public goods like schools, hospitals, and infrastructure, which are the core of development.
- Participation and Inclusivity: Democracy empowers citizens, including marginalized groups, to participate in the development process. This ensures that development is equitable and addresses the needs of the many, not just the elite.
- Prevents Catastrophes (Amartya Sen’s Argument): Nobel laureate Amartya Sen famously argued that no major famine has ever occurred in a functioning democracy. The political pressure from a free press and opposition forces a democratic government to respond to such crises, safeguarding basic development.
- Development as Freedom: Amartya Sen also conceptualized development *as* freedom. In this view, political freedoms, civil rights, and the rule of law (all components of democracy) are not just means to development but are *ends in themselves*. Thus, true development is inherently democratic.
Arguments Against the “Twins” (Conflicting Relationship)
The strongest counter-argument is the “Developmental Dictatorship” or “Lee Kuan Yew” model, which posits that authoritarianism is more efficient in driving rapid economic growth.
- The “East Asian Tigers” Example: Nations like South Korea, Taiwan, and Singapore achieved miraculous economic growth under authoritarian or semi-authoritarian regimes. They were able to impose tough, long-term economic policies (like high savings rates, land reforms) that might have been politically impossible in a short-term-focused democracy.
- The China Model: China has lifted hundreds of millions out of poverty through state-led capitalism without any democratic reforms. This model demonstrates that rapid *economic* development can, at least for a time, occur in the absence of democracy.
- Populism vs. Long-Term Growth: Democratic compulsions can lead to populist policies (e.g., unsustainable subsidies, loan waivers) that drain public finances and hinder long-term capital investment. Tough, necessary economic reforms (e.g., cutting subsidies, privatization) are often politically unpopular and are resisted.
- Slow Decision-Making: Democratic processes of debate, consensus-building, and legal challenges can be slow, delaying urgent infrastructure and development projects.
Conclusion
The statement “Development and democracy are like twins” is an optimistic oversimplification. The “twins” can and often do grow apart.
History shows that rapid economic growth can be achieved without democracy. However, this development is often brittle, unequal, and lacks the human-rights dimension. In contrast, holistic and sustainable human development—which includes political freedom, equity, and resilience—is inseparable from democracy. In the long run, development without democracy becomes unsustainable (as it lacks accountability), and democracy without development becomes unstable (as it fails to meet aspirations).
Therefore, they are not simple “twins” but complex, long-term partners whose relationship requires constant negotiation and management.
Concise Model Answer (150-Word Limit)
The statement “Development and democracy are like twins” implies they are mutually reinforcing. A critical examination reveals both synergies and conflicts.
Synergistic Relationship (Supporting “Twins”):
- Democracy fosters development through accountability (free press, elections), reducing corruption and ensuring resources are used for public good.
- It ensures inclusive development by giving voice to the marginalized. As Amartya Sen argued, no famine occurs in a functioning democracy.
- Sen also defines “Development as Freedom,” making political rights an essential component of development itself.
Conflicting Relationship (Against “Twins”):
- The “Developmental Dictatorship” model (e.g., East Asian Tigers, China) shows that rapid economic growth can be achieved by authoritarian regimes that impose tough, long-term policies.
- Democratic compulsions can lead to populism (e.g., subsidies), hindering difficult but necessary economic reforms.
In conclusion, while rapid economic growth can occur without democracy, holistic and sustainable human development is best secured by it. They are not simple “twins” but complex, long-term partners.