top of page

HISTORIAS                    Manuel Espejo

Open and Closed Societies

 

Open societies are democratic systems that uphold individual rights, typically governed by the rule of law rather than the arbitrary decisions of a single leader. They embrace freedom of thought and speech. In contrast, closed societies represent the opposite: non-democratic nations where governments aren't chosen by the people, and individuals are often not respected. In these closed societies, the law takes a backseat to the will of autocrats, and free thought and speech are suppressed, often considered as thought crimes.

The model for open societies is represented by Western countries with liberal democratic constitutions, while closed societies are exemplified by regimes such as fascist, national socialist, communist, or theocratic governments. Open societies encourage individual decision-making, whereas closed societies tend to be authoritarian, collectivist, or driven by mystical and tribal principles. Democracies or open societies usually possess institutional mechanisms for self-improvement and leadership transitions, contributing to their stability. Conversely, closed societies tend to be arbitrary and unstable, often experiencing changes through force, frequently involving violence, revolutions, or coups.

From an economic standpoint, open societies tend to generate wealth due to their stability and typically large middle classes. These societies often boast sophisticated market economies and high competitiveness in the international arena. In contrast, closed societies often have heavily state-intervened economies, where the market is frequently subordinated to the interests of the state or specific privileged classes, sometimes devoid of a market economy altogether (as in communist regimes). These systems tend to be less efficient in promoting social welfare and create polarization between the privileged few and the rest of the population, often leading to impoverishment. Additionally, corruption is more prevalent in closed societies compared to open ones.

Most countries do not fit into the extremes of being purely open or closed societies. Different nations possess a mix of institutions typical of both open and closed societies. Examples of open societies include the Nordic countries, Switzerland, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, among others, while totalitarian regimes are exemplified by countries like North Korea, Cuba, and Iran. Many nations fall somewhere between these two extremes.

For instance, Spain, a politically decentralized country, is generally considered an open society. However, certain Spanish regions are practically devoid of state control, governed by separatist factions that don't respect the individual rights of citizens who disagree with their ideology. These separatist governments often engage in political persecution and even physical attacks against non-separatist political parties and individuals, particularly during election campaigns. They also attempt cultural suppression against those who don't align with their totalitarian ideologies. In some Spanish regions, a separatist terrorist group received support from a significant portion of the population, leading to hundreds of murders, particularly in the Basque Country and Navarre. The parties governing these regions, as well as Catalonia, are often considered less democratic, even borderline totalitarian, and supportive of violence. Nevertheless, they maintain significant popular support, ensuring their continued governance in these regions. On the other hand, Spain has witnessed examples of theoretically moderate parties that, while in power at the national level, attempted to centralize power to establish patronage systems that would perpetuate their rule, akin to dictators like Chavez and Maduro in Venezuela.

Open societies, despite their strengths, also have weaknesses, as they often tolerate the existence of factions and parties that oppose open society principles, as evidenced by the examples from Spain. Philosopher Karl Popper emphasized that states should defend themselves against intolerance and should not tolerate those who seek to undermine the principles of an open society.

 

bottom of page