Debating the Transition Paradigm
Tilting at Straw Men
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 6286493 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Gerald F Hyman (corresponding author), Gerald Hyman |
| Year | 2002 |
| Volume | 13 |
| Issue | 3 |
| Pages | 26-32 |
| Publication date | 2002-07-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Journal of democracy (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 1045-5736 • E-ISSN: 1086-3214 |
| Publisher | Project MUSE (PUBLISHER • US) |
| DOI | 10.1353/jod.2002.0036 |
| OpenAlex | W2048867199 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 5 |
| References cited | 1 |
Although Thomas Carothers's critique of democracy promoters in the January 2002 Journal of Democracy was, in principle, directed at donors in general, all the examples and citations referred exclusively to the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID). Carothers's critique would be trenchant, even devastating, if it accurately portrayed USAID's thinking on democracy. But it does not. 1 The article characterizes USAID's democracy practitioners as uncritically adhering to an increasingly outmoded "transition paradigm" based on five naïve assumptions. That mischaracterization is a straw man, which is first created, then demolished. Undoubtedly, we at USAID are trying our best to promote transitions to democracy, but we do not adhere to any single transition paradigm and certainly not to the pastiche created by Carothers
Agency (philosophy · Democracy · Epistemology · International development · Political science · Politics · Social science · Sociology · Law · Philosophy · Political Philosophy and Ethics
| Unique citing works | 5 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 0,22 |
| Citation span | 2003 - 2021 (19) |
| Citation velocity | historical |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 5 |