Friday, January 2, 2009: 1:40 PM
Concourse C (Hilton New York)
There is perhaps no other moment in modern Spanish history that has been more thoroughly integrated into comparative scholarly analysis than the successful democratic transition of the 1970s. Furthermore, it is perhaps the first time that the comparison positions Spain as the positive model to emulate rather than the failure to pity or avoid. The stigma of Spain's “backwardness” or “difference” has been challenged in recent decades by historians of Spain, who have argued that Spain's modern development fit squarely inside broader European patterns. However, this revisionism within the field of Spanish history has not really changed Spain's implicit inferior status in comparative scholarship or even in popular culture. It is only when Spain transitioned to democracy in the late 1970s that it was perceived by many, inside and outside Spain, to have entered into “normal Western European patterns.” While it was clear from the early 1980s that Spain was to be “the” model for democratization in the developing world, there has been no lasting consensus regarding what the “Spanish model” comprises. The Spanish transition has been interpreted to exemplify each of the four major theoretical approaches to democratization defined by Jean Grugel. In the end, it may be the combination of so many favorable factors that constitutes the “Spanish model”, rendering it more of a unique case than a model to replicate. While most of the comparative discussion of the “Spanish model” has focused on explaining success, there is also a more muted debate about the limits of democratization Spanish style, which revolves around the quality of the democratic regime that emerged from the transition. This paper will explore how the Spanish “model” of democratization has been interpreted and incorporated into various comparative theoretical approaches, and examines the strengths and weaknesses of each of them as single factor explanations.
<< Previous Presentation
|
Next Presentation