Would you also care to explain?
An opposing model of political development views democracy as an organic,
natural outgrowth in a society that has reached a certain stage of cultural evolution. It
cannot be imposed from the outside if the society is not “ready” for it. When conditions
are propitious, it will happen more or less naturally, without any experts or social
engineers to create it.
The author creates something of a paradox by saying that democracy can't be "forced" on people, only "home-grown" as it were. If it can't be forced (by the "civil engineers"), then it somewhat inherently places less developed societies with unique characteristics below those who have reached a "cultural evolution". To me it is a paradox of sorts, because he says that we can't make people take on democracy, but that it will occur naturally when they reach a certain level of western enlightenment. To me it smacks of the thought that we must give people the tools (western culture) to reach this level of "democracy", even though he says we aren't supposed to do that because it will fail.