Can there be democracy without liberalism? Not for more than a moment. Jonah Goldberg laments that "we don't even have the language to talk about the nobility or merits of classical liberalism independent of democracy because ever since the Progressive era it's been taken as a given that enlightened rule is anything but classically liberal."
By all means, invest liberalism and then hold a popular election. What is (sadly always) missing from this debate is a distinction between principle- and practice-driven democratization; the former favored by transnationalists and the latter exercised singularly, if brilliantly, in postwar Germany and especially Japan.
Principle-driven democratization is reform in theory. It is based on the contention — really, the pretension — that simply gifting a fair ballot to a population will accurately and beneficially reflect national will. Of course, this is nonsense: if a liberal society with a rule of law is not in place, authoritarian parties will do what is necessary to conduct a nominally legitimate election, then assume power and promptly dismantle the pluralist system that brought them to power. Even if fraud is undetectable, intimidation will be culturally expressed — take Hamas' victory. What Palestinian in his right mind would have run on a platform of conciliation with Israel? Surely many Palestinians want nothing to do with bloodshot, anti-Semitic irredentism. Where was their representation? Dead, in prison or in hiding, hoping to win office by way of a write-in. And yet, to transnationalists and reactionaries, Palestinian elections were an exercise in democracy.
Practice-driven democratization is the answer to groups like Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood, bogeymen of liberalization's opponents. Simply put, practice-driven is smart pluralism: parties transparently dedicated to sundering civil society should not be allowed to participate. When charged with desecrating the sacrosanctity that is free speech, the practice-driven democratist might counter with questioning the wisdom of inviting baby-snatchers into maternity wards. General Douglas MacArthur exemplified practice-driven work in his jurisdiction of Occupied Japan. He tolerated the Moscow-directed socialists led by Kyuichi Tokuda only until February 2, 1947, when an inimical general strike was attempted by the socialists but — in abrogation of recently promulgated civil rights — prevented by Allied authorities. In the following years, particularly after Washington's Cold War-minded "reverse course" in occupation policy, the Japanese government conducted "red purges" and effectively ended Communist interference in the affairs of that country.
Most desirable to democratists are countries that are moving towards electoral democracy — Kuwait, Jordan, Bahrain, former Soviet acquisitions, and so forth. For those nations contending with authoritarians capable of manipulating the very operation intended to establish popular rule — one vote, once, The End — the state or foreign guardian cannot judge political forces equally.
There is more on this subject; in fact I have had an article about the election of Hamas half-finished for four months. I will publish as I can.