4 ms·

If true this is truly amazing. So rare nowadays to see countries move towards democracy instead away from it.

aliraheem 5y ago
Yup excellent if it pans out - although Kazakhs remain sceptical. But it is quite extraordinary to see parts of the government lead by Tokayev, eject an autocrat (Nazarbayev) and begin the process of democratisation. And it does seem to stem from a lack of willingness to carry out a crackdown on the people. It is not likely to become a liberal democracy soon if ever (not that is needs to be a goal at all). A hybrid regime is very likely though. You love to see it.
NicoJuicy 5y ago
It seems like it is, but it's not new either. Eg. This was co-ed with their president 11 years ago: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/kazakhstans-steady-progress-toward-democracy/2011/03/28/AF1XPKCC_story.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/kazakhstans-steady-p... Many signs that they have good-will for democracy, but I don't think it's easy in their position ( member of the CSTO and in Russia's "sphere of influence"). I have seen signs that they aren't just a puppet of Russia for example and I wasn't sure what was going on. But the article somewhat explained it.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- Georgelemental 5y ago
  That opinion piece is by the old leader Nazarbayev, who Tokayev just muscled out of power.
  - NicoJuicy 5y ago
    Thanks, didn't knew that. But the ( natural) direction seems to be set either way.
enaaem 5y ago
I believe most successful democracies have became this way. Most European nations went from an absolute monarchy to a constitutional one. The natural process of democracy seems to be: Dictatorship -> industrialisation -> democracy. Does any one knows any books talking about this?
- maxnoe 5y ago
  See the "Historical Materialism" of Marx and Engels: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_materialism#Trajectory_of_historical_development https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_materialism#Traje...
- yywwbbn 5y ago
  Usually the monarchy/dictatorship was overthrown to be replaced by a somewhat more democratic government (both peacefully or violently). Autocrats rarely were willing to give up any of their power voluntarily and paradoxically in the rare cases where they did it only hastened their downfall e.g. I’m pretty sure Loui didn’t expect in his worst nightmares that his head will be chopped of a couple of years later). The only successful exceptions I can think are is Spain after Franco died, Taiwan and South Korea but these are all rather modern. https://www.goodreads.com/en/book/show/38521576 https://www.goodreads.com/en/book/show/38521576 Probably not exactly what you’re looking for, but it tackles the somewhat bumpy transition from industrialization to democracy (or rather why it didn’t exactly work out that way)
  - sidibe 5y ago
    Killing Louis didn't lead to less authoritarianism it led to Robespierre and eventually Napoleon. Most of today's liberal democracies didn't come from revolution or civil war but from foreign forces deposing tyrant or peaceful transition. This includes France which only became democratic after Prussia ended Napoleon III
    - yywwbbn 5y ago
      Yes, the transition wasn’t very smooth though. In cases with little foreign interference, it was more like: Absolutist monarchy -> violent jacobin style revolution -> ??? (a lot of war and dead people)-> reactionaries come back to power -> a more moderate revolution/coup which brings a more balanced regime which establishes some kind of a rule of law based constitutional order. Britain only had a single cycle of this, while France needed 2/3. It not like the goal of Prussia was to establish a democratic regime in France, that was just side effect and arguably Napolean brought that war on himself (just like his uncle did with Russia)
baybal2 5y ago

Yup excellent if it pans out - although Kazakhs remain sceptical. But it is quite extraordinary to see parts of the government lead by Tokayev, eject an autocrat (Nazarbayev) and begin the process of democratisation. And it does seem to stem from a lack of willingness to carry out a crackdown on the people. It is not likely to become a liberal democracy soon if ever (not that is needs to be a goal at all). A hybrid regime is very likely though. You love to see it.

NicoJuicy 5y ago

It seems like it is, but it's not new either. Eg. This was co-ed with their president 11 years ago: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/kazakhstans-steady-progress-toward-democracy/2011/03/28/AF1XPKCC_story.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/kazakhstans-steady-p... Many signs that they have good-will for democracy, but I don't think it's easy in their position ( member of the CSTO and in Russia's "sphere of influence"). I have seen signs that they aren't just a puppet of Russia for example and I wasn't sure what was going on. But the article somewhat explained it.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
Georgelemental 5y ago
That opinion piece is by the old leader Nazarbayev, who Tokayev just muscled out of power.
- NicoJuicy 5y ago
  Thanks, didn't knew that. But the ( natural) direction seems to be set either way.

enaaem 5y ago

I believe most successful democracies have became this way. Most European nations went from an absolute monarchy to a constitutional one. The natural process of democracy seems to be: Dictatorship -> industrialisation -> democracy. Does any one knows any books talking about this?

maxnoe 5y ago
See the "Historical Materialism" of Marx and Engels: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_materialism#Trajectory_of_historical_development https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_materialism#Traje...
yywwbbn 5y ago
Usually the monarchy/dictatorship was overthrown to be replaced by a somewhat more democratic government (both peacefully or violently). Autocrats rarely were willing to give up any of their power voluntarily and paradoxically in the rare cases where they did it only hastened their downfall e.g. I’m pretty sure Loui didn’t expect in his worst nightmares that his head will be chopped of a couple of years later). The only successful exceptions I can think are is Spain after Franco died, Taiwan and South Korea but these are all rather modern. https://www.goodreads.com/en/book/show/38521576 https://www.goodreads.com/en/book/show/38521576 Probably not exactly what you’re looking for, but it tackles the somewhat bumpy transition from industrialization to democracy (or rather why it didn’t exactly work out that way)
- sidibe 5y ago
  Killing Louis didn't lead to less authoritarianism it led to Robespierre and eventually Napoleon. Most of today's liberal democracies didn't come from revolution or civil war but from foreign forces deposing tyrant or peaceful transition. This includes France which only became democratic after Prussia ended Napoleon III
  - yywwbbn 5y ago
    Yes, the transition wasn’t very smooth though. In cases with little foreign interference, it was more like: Absolutist monarchy -> violent jacobin style revolution -> ??? (a lot of war and dead people)-> reactionaries come back to power -> a more moderate revolution/coup which brings a more balanced regime which establishes some kind of a rule of law based constitutional order. Britain only had a single cycle of this, while France needed 2/3. It not like the goal of Prussia was to establish a democratic regime in France, that was just side effect and arguably Napolean brought that war on himself (just like his uncle did with Russia)

baybal2 5y ago