There is a notion that cultural or social anthropologists sometimes struggle against in the writing for their science.
Teleology.
It can be a false notion to think that all societies and cultures are gradually moving in the same direction with the same general end. This is Fukuyama’s great conceit, in my opinion. Huntington’s “Clash of Civilization”, while not without it’s flaws and glib generalizations, at least recognizes the reality that people are different, and they WANT to be different.
For example, to dismantle the caste system in India would also mean a direct assault on Hinduism. Which is more breakable; Hinduism or the democratic idea, in India? I don’t know the answer, but it might be a clue as to the limits of “liberal democracy”.
I, frankly would prefer progress toward “constitutional republic”, and a strict definition of that. Isn’t there a country called “The Democratic Republic of Congo”, which, in reality, is none of that?