DEMOCRACYResearchers in the 1970s and 1980s criticized
pluralism for adopting a definition of democracy
that was too satisfied with the status quo of only
limited participation in decision making. These
participatory democratic theories emphasized that
as members participate in decision making, they
learn more about the criteria that need to be used
in effective decision making and become better at
making decisions. But members also, it was ar-
gued, become better at evaluating the choice of
candidates where representatives must be elected.
Accordingly, empirical researchers began to inves-
tigate the causes and consequences of increased
participation in decision making (Finley 1973;
Pateman 1970).
In keeping with this view, researchers increas-
ingly moved to consider cases of participation
throughout society (Alford and Friedland 1975).
Participation in decision making in unions, com-
munity organizations, municipalities, and protest
groups has been analyzed and touted (Gans 1989;
Cole 1975). In organization theory, research on
different forms of worker participation in organi-
zational decision making has gained increasing
prominence. Total quality management, participa-
tory management, and worker control all have
been studied closely, not just for improvement in
productivity and quality, but also for democracy.
Much of this research emphasizes how democracy
is consistent with both effectiveness and the im-
provement of the condition of workers (Jarley,
Fiorito, and Delaney 1997). Some have even come
to see the spread of democratic management as
inevitable, although this is almost certainly exag-
gerated (Collins 1997). Yet many have worked to
show that democratic systems of management are
more broadly possible than has been thought,
although the conditions under which such systems
of decision making can be created and maintained
remain under debate (Burawoy 1982; Kanter 1983).
Renewed definitions of democracy beg a cen-
tral question in democratic research: Where do
democracies come from? The question has been
most closely studied for nation-states. Lipset iden-
tifies a set of central conditions that are associated
with the rise of democracy in nation-states. The
presence of a market economy appears to be a
necessary, although not a sufficient, condition for
democracy. A minimum level of economic devel-
opment is associated with democracy, although a
key debate is the extent to which development
leads to democracy (Bollen and Jackman 1995;
Muller 1995). Also associated with democracy is a
political culture in which the tolerance for the
rights of others is recognized. Finally, countries
with Protestant religious traditions have been more
likely to be democratic, though the significance of
that effect may be fading in the recent transition to
democracy (Lipset 1994).One of the most significant contributions to
the account of the origins of democracy is that by
Moore (Moore 1966). His analysis, standing in
contrast to a Marxist emphasis on the role of the
working class as a force in history, identified the
relationship between peasant and lord prior to
capitalism as the critical factor in determining
whether a society became democratic or autocrat-
ic. In countries such as China, France, Japan, or
Germany, repressive control over peasants by a
dominant class led either to revolution or to con-
tinued autocracy. In China, revolution led to Com-
munist autocracy; in France, because of the exist-
ence of a commercial class, revolution led, through
fits and starts, to democracy. In Japan and Germa-
ny, the failure or absence of revolution led to
continued dominance of repressive classes, lead-
ing to the rise of fascist regimes. Moore argued
that in a country such as England, however, the
greater status of labor, coupled with the nobility’s
increasing dependence on market-based agricul-
ture, led to an eventual democratic solution to
social conflict.Moore’s work has provoked considerable criti-
cism and extension (Ross et al. 1998). Downing has
shown conclusively that the nature of military
conflicts affects the success of democracy in a
country. How a nation fights its wars, and how
often it must fight, is critically determinative of the
need for repression in the mobilization of men
and weapons to fight. England’s peculiar move
toward democracy is thus critically dependent on
its position as an island nation, free from the
necessity to fight long-term, massive land wars on
the continent of Europe, and the necessity to