In their journal called Modernization Theories and Facts, Adam Przeworski and Fernando Limongi make efforts to unravel the offer insight into the changing trends in politics. The authors ponder on the causes of the rise, endurance, and fall of various political regimes. They use two distinct theories to explain the various challenges that the political regimes in light of the economic and democratic concepts. The authors sought insight into the ideal ways of reconstructing the alternative views of the link between development and democracy. They further examined the vulnerability of democracies to economic crises. The authors finally analyzed the methodological and political reflections if different regimes that experienced turmoil setting the foundation for an adverse economic outcome.
In the findings, the authors observe that democracy has a strong link to the economic development experienced by various regimes. The authors’ observations were in line with Lipset’s findings on comparative politics. They asserted that countries that have experienced stability in their political systems have always yielded satisfactory economic performance. The authors further suggest that it is chiefly through stable economic institutions that countries achieve the desired stable political stability levels. The interdependence between politics and economics offered insight into the primary causes of the political turmoil experienced in different countries. The authors argue that in countries where there is an unequal distribution of resources, the leaders set the foundation for political instability, leading to the failure of a given regime. The relationship between the levels of development and the incidences of democratic regimes is a string, emphasizing the need to have inclusive political and economic institutions to ensure a regime’s stability level.
The paper got it right by comparing different regimes to unravel the development and political state level. By comparing the different regimes, the authors found it easy to get accurate results. The approach of making a comparison of different regimes and linking the democratic levels and economic performance. Most noteworthy, the paper compared the link between politics and economic concepts in different seasons.
The comparison between the traditional setting of various regimes and modern society was important in determining the accuracy of the findings. Their findings revealed that modernization is a crucial element in confirming the relationship between democracy and economic development. They support Lipset’s argument that: “if other countries become as rich as the economically advanced nations, it is highly probable that they will become political democracies.” P.158. Using the theory of authoritarianism, they asserted that the sequence of events, one would expect that poor authoritarian countries are developing and becoming renowned democracies. However, with modernization exceryt9ng pressure for many countries to embrace democratic political structures, the level of economic performance form the different countries has significantly increased. The pare used different sets of data from various countries to show the link between the economic performance of democratic countries and those that have a dictatorial political structure. Overall, the authors did a commendable task in offering insight into the primary causes of regime rise and fall. They asserted that it is chiefly through embracing inclusive political and economic institutions that countries will set the foundation for sustaining stable regimes. Those countries that practice authoritarian polices often find it hard to sustain the desired stability in their governance structures, thus making it hard for them to maintain the desired regime stability.