2018/06/15 by Solomon Ogbonna Abugu, Augustine Ejiofor Onyishi · 1 citation
Social Sciences · #Asian Studies and History #Southeast Asian Sociopolitical Studies #International Development and Aid #Democratization #Authoritarianism #Dictatorship #Democracy #Political science #Panacea (medicine) #Political economy #Politics #Latin Americans #Development economics #Sociology #Law #Economics
paper · doi:10.33865/jssgp.003.01.0094
openalex publication_date 2018/06/15 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/06/11
Prior to the breakdown of the iron curtain, and the fall of communist regimes in the East and Central Europe, the issue of democratization were not seriously perceived in most part of the world as administrative option. It was hitherto seen as an uncertain and fragile process typified by different authoritarian delay of government business, mostly but not exclusively in Africa, Asia and Latin America. However, in contemporary time while some scholars are of the view that democratization is the only panacea for national development because of its essential attributes, other scholars contends fervently that its national development that herald democratization and not the other way round. Still others accentuate the important of authoritarian regime as a conditio sena qua non for national development. This study conversely, attempts to address this lacuna or perception controversy, with data empirically generated from the secondary source, to analyze the nature and relationship between democratization, political dictatorship and national development in the post Suharto Indonesia. Specifically, it examined whether the process of democratization in the country enhances their national development. This study however, reveals that national development is neither exclusively related to democratic political system nor authoritarian political regime