The Historical Turn in Democratization Studies: A New Research Agenda for Europe and Beyond

Abstract

This article lays the theoretical and methodological foundations of a new historically minded approach to the comparative study of democratization, centered on the analysis of the creation, development, and interaction of democratic institutions. Historically, democracy did not emerge as a singular coherent whole but rather as a set of different institutions, which resulted from conflicts across multiple lines of social and political cleavage that took place at different moments in time. The theoretical advantage of this approach is illustrated by highlighting the range of new variables that come into focus in explaining democracy's emergence. Rather than class being the single variable that explains how and why democracy came about, scholars can see how religious conflict, ethnic cleavages, and the diffusion of ideas played a much greater role in Europe's democratization than has typically been appreciated. Above all, the authors argue that political parties were decisive players in how and why democracy emerged in Europe and should be at the center of future analyses.

Textbooks in Periods of Political Transition after the Second World War

“…A similar approach to this process is provided in Daniel Ziblatt's description of nineteenth century democratization as "an asynchronic dynamic in which the different dimensions of democracy (universal suffrage, parliamentary autonomy, civil rights) were created at different time possibly for different reasons," 7 and the focus on democratization in terms of the creation and reconfiguration of democratic institutions. 8 Although each country has its own idiosyncrasies, it is possible to draw parallels and to find both analogies and differences in the "closing phases of authoritarian rule," 9 "democratic openings" and "consolidations" examined, as well as in the textbooks produced during such complex processes. Furthermore, adhering to the historical turn in democratization studies, it is possible to address education as one of the agents of the process, a non-class factor driving institutional change, 10 focusing on a key politico-educational mechanism of one of its institutions, the school, and demonstrating how the dynamic and unstable process of political transition affects textbooks.…”

“…8 Although each country has its own idiosyncrasies, it is possible to draw parallels and to find both analogies and differences in the "closing phases of authoritarian rule," 9 "democratic openings" and "consolidations" examined, as well as in the textbooks produced during such complex processes. Furthermore, adhering to the historical turn in democratization studies, it is possible to address education as one of the agents of the process, a non-class factor driving institutional change, 10 focusing on a key politico-educational mechanism of one of its institutions, the school, and demonstrating how the dynamic and unstable process of political transition affects textbooks.…”

“…Political transitions cause textbooks to experience their own slow transition or transformation of knowledge and didactics, proving that democratization is "a long term process that can usefully be thought as a chain of big and small events, not always moving unidirectionally towards full democracy." 36 In addition, by addressing the question of temporality, textbooks offer an example of cultural and political educational objects that exist within the width and thickness of time,"-a width that "enables historical fluidity, conceiving the present not as a 'period' but as a process of transformation of the past into the future (and vice versa). A thickness that makes us live, simultaneously, different temporalities overlapping in such way that time is no longer a single 'thread' (the thread of time) but is represented with a string in which lots of threads are intertwined.…”

Origins and Outcomes of Electoral Institutions in African Hybrid Regimes: A Comparative Perspective

“…The advantage of analyzing these important episodes of institutional decision-making two decades later is that we now know a lot about their medium-term consequences. We are thus aiming at "reading history forward" (Capoccia and Ziblatt 2010) by looking at the aspirations, intentions, and options of institutional decision-making in six systematically selected cases. These are two hybrid (Niger, Zambia) and four contrastive casesin the latter of which a higher level of democratization has been achieved (Benin, Ghana) or the regime has remained authoritarian (Cameroon, Togo).…”

“…However, only the most recently advanced theory -that of the "historical turn" (Capoccia and Ziblatt 2010) -in political science claims to "read history forward;" in other words, to systematically take into account the decision-making alternatives and the possible impacts of contingencies. Capoccia and Ziblatt argue that interests and social structures may not explain the full picture in retrospect.…”