leads analysts to gloss over the amount of process it took to get these established democracies to function the way they currently do , the social divisions that had to be overcome , and the fact that a great deal more work is needed in every case to maintain the current stability .
Viewing good governance as a pre-defined result or an off-the-shelf product , for example , can blind analysts to the fact that within a population that has deep social divisions and no history of power-sharing government , the sudden institution of elections can have the effect of deepening rifts as each social group votes along partisan lines for its own people and agenda . 6263 In nations with a marginalized minority , the idea of representative democracy carries frightening overtones of the “ tyranny of the majority .” 64 In countries such as Iraq and Sri Lanka , where such fears are based on painful experience , majoritarian democracy has contributed significantly to conflict rather than to peace . Even within a comparatively stable nation such as the United States , minority populations all too often feel that rule of law is applied inequitably to them 65 .
Why change our conceptions ?
The non-governmental organization ( NGO ) Freedom House reports that 2015 saw the ninth straight year of decline in democracy and human freedom worldwide . 66 It is true , although simplistic , to say that building sustainable democratic governance is a long , slow process . But that nine-year trend combined with the high percentage of new democracies that slide back into chaos within a few years is sending a message : something is wrong with our conceptions and our process .
43