Comparative Politics

B05 - Rethinking Democracy: From Postcolonial Theories to Electoral Realities

Date: Jun 3 | Time: 03:30pm to 05:00pm | Location:

Chair/Président/Présidente : Jessica Burch (Simon Fraser University)

Discussant/Commentateur/Commentatrice : Christian Houle (Michigan State University)

Decolonizing democracy: National sovereignty and methodological nationalism in democratic studies: Noaman Ali (University of Bath), Luke Melchiorre (Universidad de los Andes)
Abstract: In the past decade, the movement to decolonize the social sciences has gained significant momentum, paralleling growing global concerns about democratic decline. Scholarship, however, on decolonizing the social sciences and democratic studies have seldom intersected. This paper draws on critical scholarship and theories from the Global South to expand the scope of democratic studies, both substantively and methodologically. We contend that the dominant liberal framework in the study of democracy, with its narrow focus on formal procedures and institutions, is constrained by methodological nationalism, which obscures how global political economy shapes power relations at both domestic and international levels. Societies in the postcolonial Global South, in particular, are profoundly affected by external economic and political processes imposed without their input. Despite raising important questions of democratic legitimacy, as recent counter-power-focused theories of democracy suggest, studies of democratization continue to ignore or downplay such routine external disruptions to popular empowerment. In contrast, scholars from the Global South have compellingly argued that the economic restrictions of the Washington Consensus during the third wave of democratization reduced democracies to “choiceless” or “low intensity” forms. By emphasizing these extra-national dynamics, we contend that efforts by Global South countries to defend national—especially economic—sovereignty are essential for fostering more egalitarian distributions of power on a global scale. Thus, national sovereignty should be a crucial dimension in the study and assessment of democracy. Broadening our understanding of democracy therefore requires a deconstruction—that is, decolonization—of liberal frameworks.

Rethinking Democracy: postcolonial Africa as site of democratic experimentation: Luke Melchiorre (Universidad de los Andes)
Abstract: This paper challenges the dominant narrative that positions liberal democracy as the definitive model of governance, arguing that postcolonial Africa has long been an overlooked yet dynamic site of democratic experimentation. Drawing on the critical insights of Africanist scholars such as Claude Ake and Thandika Mkandawire, and examining case studies like Guinea-Bissau’s liberated zones, Mauritius’ developmental democracy, and Tanzania’s one-party system, this study explores how these African political projects articulated alternative visions of democracy that depart from liberal norms. These approaches emphasize participatory governance, developmental priorities, and communitarian values, all shaped by specific socio-political contexts. In challenging the conflation of democracy with liberalism, this paper argues that these African models offer substantial contributions to democratic theory. It advocates for decentering Western frameworks in the study of democracy, both in theory and practice. While it is essential to acknowledge that these 20th-century African experiments fell short of realizing their democratic ideals, it is equally crucial to view these efforts not as “finished products or realized objectives,” but as “aspirations and processes,” as Hardt (2024) notes. This perspective not only sheds light on the diversity of African democratic imaginaries but also underscores the tangible obstacles these experiments faced in practice. Ultimately, this paper repositions postcolonial African democratic experiments as neither peripheral nor pathological, but as legitimate and innovative responses to complex socio-political realities and international constraints. In doing so, it contributes to a more nuanced understanding of democracy—one that recognizes its variability and the importance of considering diverse historical and cultural expressions in redefining democratic practice.

Exposing Inter-Party Animosity in a Consociational Democracy: Thorn in the Side or Fatal Blow?: Lucas Kins (Université libre de Bruxelles), Caroline Close (Université libre de Bruxelles)
Abstract: Consociationalism designates political systems that are designed to manage societal divisions, by ensuring power-sharing and consensus-building among the different social, ethnic, or religious groups of a country. As a result, it is generally described as a “distinctively non-populist conception of democracy” (Bogaards, 2019; p. 342). Nevertheless, recent research has highlighted the many limits of such a system (Caluwaerts & Reuchamps, 2020), especially in a context of growing polarization. In parallel, social media have become a key tool of political communication among elites, thanks to the direct link with voters they provide (Huber, 2022), and their intensive use by a multitude of political actors, including political parties (Farrer, 2022; Wouters et al., 2022). Most of the existing research has focused on the use of digital campaign tools by challenger –often so-called anti-establishment— parties or candidates, and its consequences on the polarization of the electorate, especially in majority systems (