Back in the 19th century The writer once argued that the process of economic and political modernization was leading not to communism, but to some form of liberal democracy and a market economy. And history appeared to culminate in liberty: elected governments, individual rights, an economic system which capital&labor circulated with relatively modest state oversight. And the 21th century contemporary global political status proves the thesis. Also, a foreign-policy analyst argued that the old time geopolitics had returned, and due to the conflicts at both ends of Eurasia, The global stability is threatened. The existence of those problems cannot completed blame for the authoritarian systems, but the cases of failure of democracy.
Comparing with 1989, Huge economic improvements like globalization, for example rapid growth of trade, and significant changes in political sphere like countries experiencing democracy has grew from world’s 30% to 60%, is clearly linked. Although democracy somewhat experienced in recession, still, democracy has no competitor. The writer particularly pointed out the ‘Chinese model’ cannot lasts for long and will copy the western democracy. The writer also argued that the successful implementation of democracy requires leadership, organizational skills and people who are willing to fighting for rule of law, human rights and political accountability. One of the main reasons for failure of democracy is the absence of provision of what people want from the government. Although India seems to implementing democracy well externally, but due to corruption and patronage, sucks, and being unable to provide modern infrastructure and basic services. Over-concentration on the constraints of authority led USA to a low-efficiency state government. For conclusion, the writer adds on a few uncertainties for the argument of ‘democracy is the final state of political system’, the first one is that the successful implementation of...