Is the rapid urban growth beneficial or harmful for developing democratic government in third world

Basically how has rapid urban growth impacted the democratic development.
Asked Aug 09, 2010
It is impossible to provide one answer that would describe all third world countries. The answer depends on how the legislative districts are apportioned and they aren't the same throughout the third world.

Highly populated areas tend to vote for socialized programs and rural areas for self reliance, i.e. less government intervention and control. Without any other apportionment vehicle, rapid urban growth would tend to force government toward socialized, centrally controlled systems which would make it easier for the defeat of democracy.

In the Unites States, our Congress has 1 Represenative per ten thousand population and 2 Senators from each state. If all of the representation was based on population, 5 or 6 of the largest urban areas would control the government and the areas that provide the food and many of the necessary products for the urban areas would have no control at all. Having the Senate apportioned by area created a balance in the U.S. But all third world countries don't work that way.

My answer would be urban growth works against democracy in countries where the legislature is apportioned by population only and in favor of it in countries that have a vehicle to balance rural and urban interests. Whether or not that's beneficial depends on your point of view.

Answered Aug 09, 2010
Thank you very much for the time that you took to answer my question to the best of your abilities if you have anymore information that you could possibly provide please don't hesitate to let me know and thank you once again.

TIP: If it's not your answer to this question, please click "Leave a Comment" button under the question to communicate with the question owner.