One of the big misconceptions about dictatorships that both expats and western governments have is that they are “stable”. They don’t have demonstrations like democracies (because the people are terrified of being shot at them), and they are often ruled by a sensible, corrupt, but passive overlord. In fact, dictatorships are inherently unstable.
A lot of westerners think dictatorships are ok “for them”. This means that while they themselves would never want to be born and raised in a democracy, they are perfectly happy to put up with foreigners being ruled by dictatorships, so long as those dictatorships are friendly the west and its policies. If these dictatorships offer well paid jobs for underqualified expats, all the better! Take this misguided article written by a US government foreign policy analyst:
This is not to say that the survival of the monarchs represents anything close to the triumph of democracy sought by Arab youthful protestors. But jobs, food, education, and a voice to build a pathway towards a less-shameful future are the real demands, and monarchies, especially ones that seem to be more responsive to constitutional reforms and the sharing of power, may provide a path there.
This is just plain wrong. Almost all dictatorships collapse in the face of enormous protests or an assault by the military. Some dictatorships, if they are kings, are clever enough to prevent this from happening by offering to become constitutional monarchies. As a constitutional monarchy they are still around but only figureheads. However, in the case of the Middle East, not one monarchy has actually offered this. Instead all they have offered to their people are bribes. The author does not seem to understand that there has been no effort on the part of ruling elites to make pathways to democracy. In fact they have offered nothing to their populations which is why they are all in danger of collapsing.
You see, the reaction of these monarchies is actually quite normal. A constitutional monarchy means no power, and that means that the people may decide at a future date to do away with the monarchy altogether. When the people demand a constitutional monarchy, they are essentially asking the royal government to commit suicide and be reborn as something else entirely. That is a hard pill to swallow and history has shown us (Tsarist Russia, the Kaiser in Germany, the French monarchies) that royalty tends to fight to the last man to stop abdication.
Democracies are the stable countries
In fact, the countries that are stable are really democracies. While a dictatorship may only have a revolution once every fifty years, the fact is that ALL dictatorships seem to have these. How often to democracies have revolutions? The answer is that it isn’t often. The last revolution in the United States was unsuccessful and occurred in 1865. The UK has not had one since the 18th century, and so on. You can seem my tab above on the most politically stable countries for more insight on this.
The reason democracies are more stable than dictatorships is because of elections. Elections are essentially controlled revolutions. Revolutions stem from an unhappy populace. If the population knows they can elect a completely different leader (i.e. from a different political party, or a new personality) they know that there is a chance that this new leadership will be able to solve some of the problems facing the country. With a dictatorship the problems and the leadership remain the same, in most cases because the problems are caused by the leadership! The leader becomes a lightning rod for hatred.
We should stop wishing a government on Arabs and let them choose their own
In the long run, if Arabs are able to pull of successful democracies, it will mean more trade and prosperity in the west and more jobs for expats. There is overwhelming evidence that liberal democracies produce more wealth and economic growth than dictatorships. Every dictatorship in the world has either collapsed into a democracy, or remains mired in horrific poverty. Yes, that includes China. Most of the countries considered liberal and free democracies have the highest standard of living in the world. Even wealthy dictatorships like Qatar or Brunei have hundreds of thousands of immigrant laborers living in indentured servitude like conditions. Prosperity in those countries is meant only for an elite few.
While there is great uncertainty in these revolutions, and some of the revolutions will probably turn out poorly and establish governments we in the west may not like. But the fact remains that the people chose this path. The path was not chosen for them. They are on the same journey that we in the west took several decades or centuries ago. It is all part of the process of evolution and development.
