{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.013686131386861315, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0036496350364963502, 'mean_word_length': 5.608433734939759, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Democracy: the Civil War and the transnational struggle for electoral reform

ABSTRACT This article argues against the often-made connection between democratic reform and Union victory in the Civil War. Defining democracy narrowly as an electoral process, the article looks at France, the German states, a selection of Latin American countries, and Great Britain to illustrate that democratic reforms were an ongoing conversation started long before the Civil War. While the Second Empire of Napoleon III receives much scholarly attention because of its perceived autocratic tendencies, historians often forget that Napoleon retained universal manhood suffrage during his reign. More importantly, the article illustrates that the United States were a symbol of what to avoid during Great Britain's Reform Act debates as democracy was frequently equated with mob rule. Overall, the article illustrates that the countries discussed had ongoing conversations about democratic electoral reforms well before the 1860s and that debates surrounding democratic reforms did not focus on the United States.