Developmental states should not be confused with social democratic states which
have a broader social and political objective.Totalitarianism is very much a twentieth-
century phenomenon--associated, in particular, with Nazi Germany, Stalin's Soviet
Union, and East Germany--althougLiberal democracies--such as the USA, the UK, and Germany--are characterized by free
and fair elections involving universal suffrage, together with a liberal political framework
consisting of a relatively high degree of personal liberty and the protection of individual
rights.This failure, it is argued, has hindered the social democratic project because greater social
and economic equality is greatly assisted by general economic prosperity which provides a
great deal more resources to redistribute.Here, a useful distinction is to be made between liberal democra-
cies, illiberal democracies, and authoritarian regimes (Hague and Harrop, 2007: 7-9).Illiberal democracies--such as Russia and Malaysia--are characterized by elections
but relatively little protection of rights and liberties, and state control over the means of
communication.The political elites in such regimes can derive from the military, royalty, ruling par-
ties, or merely be individual dictators.One of the
criticisms of post-1945 British political and economic development is that Britain adopted
a social democrat approach but neglected the developmental aspect (Marquand, 1988).