Arab democratization has received significant international attention in the last decade. While heavily spurred on by George W. Bush’s “freedom agenda,” public discourse on the topic receded again in 2007 due to faltering progress in Iraq and electoral outcomes in Lebanon and Palestine that were unwelcomed by the US and others. However, with the ousting of Presidents in Tunisia and Egypt, as well as unprecedented popular uprisings in countries like Algeria and Yemen, discourses about Arab democracy are again on the rise. To understand democracy’s regional potential more must be known about how it is envisioned, explained, and employed by the people expected to embrace it. Toward this goal, I utilize a communication-centered approach to examine important discourses on democratization within Kuwait—where a constitutional monarchy has been incrementally and peacefully ceding power to one of the oldest and most autonomous of Arab parliaments. Findings are based on in-depth interviews with Sunni and Shi’a Islamists, women’s political activists, political liberals, and others actively engaged in defining the terms of the national political process. Interviews examined three areas related to liberalization and democratic functioning: impressions, initiatives, and ideas. Impressions of local, regional, and transnational debates on democratization were largely similar across the groups, often having more to do with national identity than ideologies or demographics. The second area of inquiry explored the mechanisms employed in promoting political and social initiatives. Digital media play an increasingly important role, but traditional media and interpersonal contact are preferred. Established political organizations were somewhat inconsistent in their interest in, or utilization of, new media, but marginalized groups have effectively combined agency with technology to gain greater “discursive capital.” The third area of inquiry examined people’s ideas about democracy in general and in Kuwait specifically. A broad diversity of perspectives exists but one consistent concern is that the country’s comparatively high level of political liberalization often impedes development and political functioning. What differs between groups is the blame for this perceived dysfunction. Theoretically, this project adds important communication dimensions to regional work in which area studies and comparative researchers predominate. Functionally, it draws attention to developments in the Arabian Gulf that have been largely overlooked to date. By examining discourses of local political actors involved in peaceful and indigenous democratization, the notion of democracy itself can be opened to important reinterpretations that integrate a unique set of Arab perspectives into its rich assortment of meanings.