User talk:Earthpig

Propaganda. If the play button doesn't work, click "more" and then "java".

test

For everything in the gray boxes below that looks horribly ugly, it looks much nicer if you click 'edit' and view the original text.

This is for Bellisimo's Comparative Politics Class at College of Marin.

The test is on 10 May, she said we are allowed 1 single page of hand-written notes, front side only.

Click edit (no need to create an account).
An asterisk ( * ) is for a bullet item. A sharp ( # ) is for a numbered list. That will make sense after you have clicked edit.
Contribute - doing so is more likely to get others to do so as well, which will benefit you.
Be Bold in your editing. Don't worry about complete sentences or making everything pretty, these are notes.
If you put something up and it is now gone, click "view history" -- all revisions are saved, nothing is ever truly erased or lost.
Also worth noting:

Don't worry about rules. Don't worry about formatting, don't worry about grammar checking. Just contribute.
This is not communism.
Why haven't you clicked "edit" yet, and participated?

CLICK EDIT.

Also look/contribute here (must be logged into gmail to edit) for the Google Doc that can be simultaneously edited by everyone. I think I enabled public access, which is read-only, so if you want to have editing access I need your email/gmail address to add you to the document (currently there are 6 or 7 on it already). Please send mail to shpydah@gmail.com to get added to editing list. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shpydah (talk • contribs) 19:20, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Question 1: Models

There is no agreement on how to divide up nations when making comparisons. We discussed several models that group countries by their level of development along a continuum. Review these models and comment on the pros and cons of each.

She said that Weber's model and the Traditionalist v Modern model do not need to be discussed here.
My list of models (may be incomplete):

Aristotle - Aristocracy

(peter)

1.   States are defined/classified by:
                  a. The numbers and kinds of Rulers in the society;
                  b. Groupings, composition of leadership;
                  c. Number of members of society participating:

1)   One, Few, Many
                  d. The ethical quality of the leader(s), two groups:

1)   Individuals grouped who rule in the general interest of society;

2)   Those who rule based on self-interest;
                  e. Which social/economic group the leader(s) is/are from;

1)   Aristocracy vs. Proletariat, or born into a caste system;

2.   Breakout:  What are the combinations and their attributes?
                  a. One Leader:

1)   General Interest:  Monarchy; Social Status: Bloodline Elite

2)   Self Interest: Dictator or Tyrant; Social Status: Elite or Bloodline Elite;

a)   Characterized by NO CHECKS ON POWER;
                 b.            Few Leaders:

1)   General interest: Aristocracy; Social Status: WEALTHY

2)   Self-Interest: Oligarchy, Junta (Military); Social Status: WEALTHY

a)   Aristotle favored aristocracy as ‘most beneficial’ form of government; personal wealth has invested these few in society, therefore they will ensure society “performs”;

b)   These people have proven they are successful, therefore ‘fit to lead’;

c)   They self-monitor, keep each other honest and in check (in theory);

d)  Alexander Hamilton saw this as a potential model for the U.S., minus the hereditary aspect;
                  c. Many Leaders:

1)   General Interest:  Democracy; Social Status: Middle class/Poor;

a)   Perceived as a “Mob”, and therefore as unfit to lead;

b)   Jefferson saw the opposite however, saw people as knowing what was in their own best interests if they could decide in concert;

2)   Self-Interest: “Mobocracy”; Social Status: Middle class/Poor;

McCormick:

See the Google doc here for more complete notes. Feel free to contribute there.

This model has fallen out of favor, however:
Based on the bias that all countries should and want to be moving in the direction of the U.S./Industrialized 'Norm.'
Based on value judgments: How far from the U.S. status is a given country? How quickly are they moving towards/away from U.S.?

Based on ideas contained within Structuralism
1. Analyzes societies on a statistical basis, looks at structures of society as basis of unit of attribution.

(begin peter's notes)

1. Based on precepts contained within structuralism:
                  a. Analyzes societies on a statistical basis, looks at structures of society as basis of     unit of attribution;
                  b. Is essentially a value judgment:

1)   How far from the U.S. are they?

2)   How quickly are they moving towards/away from U.S. status?

2.   Attributes of comparison:
                 a. Economy
                 b. Political System:

1)   People’s beliefs in the structures, constitution;

2)   Level of confidence in above;

3)   Length of existence of the Constitution;
                  c. Social/Demographic system:

1)   Religions: what are they?  How many?

2)   Treatment/Perception of women;

3)   # of people, and their:

a)   Wealth, education, language, cultural/historical background;

3.   This model stems from Cold War thinking:  is a Cold War model;
                 a. Alternative spectrum
                 b. Non-communist countries:

1)   Socialist, Democratic, Authoritarian

2)   Bias assumes a spectrum of Authoritarian to Democratic and Communist  to Free Market Liberal Democracies

4.   Liberal Democracies: Profile
                  a. Relatively stable governments – no risk of internal collapse;
                  b. Wealthy:

1)   Per capita GDP is high, GDP is high;
                  c. Urbanized:

1)   Most of the population lives in urban areas / near urban areas;
                  d. Defined and consistent/predictable political institutions:

1)   Function of the system is the same all over the nation;

2)   Record of behavior (on the part of government/institutions) that the public trusts;

3)   Deviations from trusted/accepted norms cause outcry;
                  e. Ways for citizens to participate in the political process:

1)   Rules for this participation and for the system at large exist and are understood/available to the public;
                  f. Rule Of Law system, possible to change the Constitution via public will;
                 g. Exercise/acknowledge individual rights, civil liberties:

1)   Government protects citizens from the government;

a)   There is a division of authority;
                 h. Predominantly these nations are market economies:

1)   Mainly service and industry based economies, industries that connote high levels of education;

2)   Light industry, services, agri-business;
                  i. Citizens enjoy a high standard of living (HDI basis);

5.   Communist/Post-Communist Countries: Profile
                  a. At some point all of these had Communism as a constitutional GOAL (Utopian Communism);
                  b. Generational impact in how they relate to the world;

1)   “Failed Utopians”
                  c. Experimented with various command economy structures, most are now transitioning to market economies;

6.   Newly Industrializing Countries (NICs):  Formerly the “Third World”
                  a. Countries whose economies are “improving” from the state they were in as ‘satellite’ nations;
                 b. Some have emerging democratic regimes;
                 c. Politically stable regimes in any case and in general;
                 d. They are experiencing rapid economic growth as of the early 21st century:

1)   Increase in urban populations;

2)   Increase in manufacturing & the % of GDP coming from Mfg.

3)   Decrease in rural populations;

4)   EXPORT LED economic growth;

5)   Dependence on “Free Market” policies, IMF/World Bank ‘assistance’;

6)   Labor policy is dictated by external agreement with aid-giving nations/organizations;
                  e. Includes the countries that are shifting from agriculture to industry;
                  f. Products mfg. are intended for export;
                 g. They are making an attempt to invest in infrastructure reform:

1)   Education, healthcare, water/waste mgmt., transportation systems;

2)   Puts pressure on the middle class;

7.   Less Developed Countries (LDCs):
                  a. Political System:

1)   Have potential to build legitimate and stable political structures, but experience frequent setbacks in this process;

2)   Long-term goals of stability/development, but which are compromised by their short-term challenges (e.g. Corruption, demographic divisions);

3)   Weak or immature political institutions (e.g. weak judicial system);

4)   Efficiency of their bureaucracy is indifferent or top heavy;
                 b. Economy:

1)   Dependent on agriculture;

2)   Still have small range of products they can export, mostly primary products that experience immense competition on international markets;
                  c. Social/Demographics:

1)   High unemployment, significant portion of the population living at subsistence level;

2)   Poorly developed social services due to a low GDP and small tax  base (among other things, like above: inefficient gov’t);

3)   Poor rate of political participation, weak national identity among citizens;

8.   Islamic Countries:
                  a. Majority of population is Muslim;

1)   This is one of the most obviously inconsistent variables about this model as illustrated by this question:

a)   WHERE are Indonesia and Turkey?  Largest Muslim populations in the world.
                 b. Islam is a political AND religious force;
                 c. Economically defined by the fact that they are predominantly Muslim;
                 d. Not all are radical, but almost all have some fundamentalist influence in/on the society;

9.   Failed/Marginal States:  SEE Foreign Policy Journal index of FSI criteria
                  a. Brain drain, corruption, perception of population “flight”
                  b. Includes the states that are considered to be going backwards;
                  c. No legitimate government;

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.61.142.86 (talk) 06:59, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Geographic

1. Nations share characteristics based on their closeness to each other
2. Seven Groups

a. Western Europe
i. Norway, Sweden, UK, Ireland, Netherlands, Germany, Belgium, France etc

b. Russia and Slavic Europe
i. The satellite states around Russia included

1. Poland, Czech Republic, Ukraine, Bosnia, Croatia, etc

c. Asia
i. Includes East Asia, Central and South Asia, Southeast and Northeast Asia

d. Latin America
i. North, Central, and South America

1. Mexico and everything south of Mexico plus the carribean

2. Most were settled by the portugese, French, or the Spanish

e. The Middle East
i. Includes North Africa, and the Persian Gulf

f. Sub-Sahara Africa

g. The United States and Canada
3. Traits

a. Common Core Culture
i. Areas of the world that share common traditions, some sort of common experiences, not necessarily a common language

b. Geographic proximity

c. Economic Interdependence
i. Countries that trade with one another

1. Involved in the trade with neighboring countries

d. They have a similarity in political traditions
i. Including similar political experiences which helped develop similar political systems.

e. Shared history
i. One thing that makes this model salient.
ii. They share common experiences

1. That helps them develop an interdependence because they know their neighbor.

a. Decent level of respect and trust between neighbors

Cold War

(peter)

1.   1st World:
                  a. Liberal democracies and their satellites;
                  b. Sometimes these satellites were dictatorships;

2.   2nd World:            
                  a. Communist nations and their satellites;

3.   3rd World:
                  a. All underdeveloped countries, including “satellites” that fit here/are not attached/under the influence of either of the two great power states;

Nations by extreme

This model compares nations that are extreme in different ways to identify similarities to derive answers about particular issues. The model is sufficient to look at a narrow scope on an issue involving countries that are generally equal, but lacks the ability to provide a universal index for all countries. This model focuses on three main parts when making comparisons, they are:

1) GDP Comparisons

2) Population Comparisons

3) Geographical Comparisons —Preceding unsigned comment added by 152.132.10.134 (talk) 03:00, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Colonial status

(Start Chris' notes on this)
colonized early or late?
colonizer or colony?
how did they treat native population?
how does that affect development?
local resources?
bureaucrats?
(End Chris' notes on this)

Magstadt/Schotten

This model focuses on four different sections. As said in class, the order of these four sections does not matter.

1) Authoritarian States- These countries have traditional rule, they are mainly monarchies and are aclaimed by divine rule.

2) Constitutional Democracies- In these countries power is derived by popular rule. The rules are set and based around common law.

3) Failed Utopians- These are all totalitarian states, and communist countries. The important fact that separates in from Authoritarian States is that the ideology does not come from church but rather a political party and charismatic leader.

4) Developing Countries- These countries account for all industrial countries and countries and countries working toward modernization. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 152.132.10.134 (talk) 02:20, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Failed Utopias

(is that part of Maxdat/Shotten??? I agree that these two models must be the same!!! I am interested to see what more of the class is thinking about this.)

(Sean: My notes have Max&Shottie on the same line with the Failed Utopians, so I assume this is correct.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.210.34.22 (talk) 21:07, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at my notes, they seem to be the same to me too. Earthpig (talk) 04:59, 10 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Kesselman/Krieger

I think I have notes on all of them, but I am not going to scan/type all of them. Tell me what you need.

F. Kesselman/Krieger:

1. 3 categories – model is based on a democracy-centric bias.

a. Consolidated Democracies:

1) Long established: Shaky definition, e.g. Mexico is not a democracy under this model, but Germany, U.S., U.K., France, Japan and India are;

2) Qualitative differences: single party in power in Mexico for long periods of time;

3) Extent of democratic practices: how pervasive is democracy.

4) Highly subjective.

b. Transitional Democracy:

1) What you’re ‘working towards,’ i.e. developing democratic processes

2) Newly established democracies

3) Brazil, Russia, Mexico, Nigeria;

c. Authoritarian Regimes:

1) Top-down, non-democracies. Doesn’t matter of it is a totalitarian, fascist, etc. state;

2) Not changing/moving towards democracy

3) China, Iran

2. Profile of Democracy under this model:

a. Selection of leadership: free and fair elections, might include some leeway for corruption;

b. Multiple political parties, free to organize and free to compete;

c. Specified procedures for developing public policy. A codified system of lawmaking. Rational Basis;

1) Methods of various elements: fast-tracking

2) System to execute these laws, public policy

d. Civil Rights: government has the responsibility to protect the population from the government: division of powers.

1) Codified civil rights / implied (but practiced/observed too)

2) Government must have institutions established to protect/uphold these laws and rights;

e. Independent Judiciary: one that can make decisions free of the influence of the executive or legislative branches of gov’t;

1) E.g. Roosevelt stacking the courts: example of executive having power over the judiciary;

Question 2: Weber

Max Weber's model is of particular interest because it poses traditional and charismatic systems against a bureaucratic model. Explain these three types of systems and discuss Weber's bias toward the bureaucratic model.

This looks very close to my notes, except it is called "Legal" there, and "Bureaucratic" in my notes.

From here: "On the other hand, these (Bureaucratic and Traditional) systems can be challenged by the appearance of a new charismatic leader, especially during economic or military crises."

Also, my notes mention "divine right" as often being the source of authority in the Traditional systems.
In addition, my notes have value judgments attributed to Weber by our professor:

Traditional system is stable but undesirable.
Charismatic system is unstable and undesirable. Symptomatic of a society not developing strong bureaucratic systems; this represents a derailment/sidetrack in moving from #1 to #3.The leadership of these countries is based around the magnetism of one individual, and thus a power vaccum is created by the government. This ultimately ends up with the people of the community being oppressed.
Bureaucratic (aka "Legal" according to wikipedia) is both stable and desirable. In this sysem of government, officials have to adhere to a set of rules like the common people. The rules are usually set by the community, by popular vote and are secular. <-- That is part of Weber's bias. The other part may be that he was a German in the late 19th and early 20th century (pre-Nazi era), and thus grew up in a society placing a very high value on systems and organization and whatnot.

I guess you could say that this German warned of someone like Hitler with his writing on the Charismatic system; he was present as an advisor when the post-WW1 constitution of the Weimar Republic was written, and Hitler's "Charismatic" (to his supporters) regime is what replaced that "Bureaucratic" Weimar system.
(end chris' notes)

Question 3: Traditional and Modern

What are the characteristics of the traditional versus modern model? Describe its economic, social/demographic, and political characteristics. Again, how is the bias toward western civilizations shown in this model?

The Traditional Model:

Economic: Majority of population engaged in agriculture, or agriculture remains most of GDP. Industry and service sectors are small. Many agriculturalists are living at subsistence. Therefore, country as a whole has very little money to spend on infrastructure. Poor country.

Social: Populations are rural, and the chief social relationship is to their family first, then up the ladder to their tribe or clan or local community. The tribe or clan sets the values for the community as a whole, and the tribes or clans make very strong distinctions between themselves and other tribes in the same country (strong local identity, weak national identity).

Demographics: Rural with some port cities because they must be so import-oriented. Less literate, less educated, poorer (higher percentage of population that lives at or under the poverty line). Small to no middle class structure.

Political: Very few people participate in politics because only the educated really can. Very small middle class and even smaller rich elite. Rule tends to be justified by heredity and/or divine right. Authoritarian government. Cannot break out of authoritarian style of government into a democracy due to not having a learned class of potential political participants.

The Modern Model:

Economic: Majority of population is engaged in industry and service. Only a small percentage of workers work in agriculture. The country focuses largely on trade with foreign nations. The economy is highly influenced by science and technology. New advancements make the production of goods more efficient, therefore the economy relies heavily on large industries for its growth.

Social: Populations are urbanized, due to the high number of jobs provided by large industrial companies. Citizens of these countries have many social relationships that are complex and provide a network for communication. Examples of this are, belonging to a church, being part of a growing company, memberships to gyms and social clubs, community boards and clubs based around education, hobby clubs, and political parties. Citizens who belong to many social clubs are less likely to be extremely loyal to one group, because they have so much involvement in other clubs. These people have a strong national identity.

Demographics: Populations have high literacy rates. People tend to live longer and are healthier because medical care is more readily available. There is a large middle class who favor community involvement. People tend to make decisions that are favorable to their future oppose to living on a day to day basis.

Political: Large majority indirectly participate in political structure. The decision making is based upon a justified set of rational principals. In other words, people use a logical standpoint when making decisions;they favor being informed on both sides of an issue, rather than ignoring an issue. Political system follows a set of rules that people agree on (i.e a constitution). Government is democratic with some style system of checks and balances.

(Can anyone identify the BIAS in this model? Unsure as to whether she wants a description of a bias inherent in the model, or if she means the real-world bias - ie, the exploitation of undeveloped countries - that the model uncovers) —Preceding unsigned comment added by ProletarianSean (talk • contribs) 04:08, 10 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Question 4: Clash of Civilizations

In The Clash of Civilizations, Samuel P. Huntington eloquently puts forth the hypothesis that, "The fundamental source of conflict in this new world will not be primarily ideological or primarily economics. The great divisions among humankind and the source of conflict will be cultural." Explain huntington's theory and argue either for or against it based on the current clashes in the world. Include arguments posed by Said as well.

The Clash of Civilizations - Wikipedia article.
She handed us an inaccurate/illegible version of this (click on it, and then again, for higher resolution):

If you want to argue against it this part of the wiki article may help.

Numbered item.

Huntington Model

Nations that were ignored by globalization and trade agreements between rich countries are more susceptible to radical terrorism.

1.	Hunting had a vision of a world divided by civilizations
a.	He saw as the fundamental source of conflict between human kind was division between civilizations
i.	Instead of Economy
b.	He didn’t feel that nations states would cease to exist
i.	He thought that nations would remain powerful.
1.	“Realists” thought that The United States supplementing other nations through trade was creating losses of opportunity for The United States
2.	Huntington disagreed with this
2.	He believed that the worse places for conflict between civilizations were at fault lines between civilizations
a.	Nations that sit between civilizations that are completely different would the stages for future battleground
i.	Turkey sits between the middle east and Europe.
3.	Huntington defines civilization as the highest cultural grouping of people at the broadest level.
a.	Several cultures can be put together into one civilization
b.	The largest thing that people identify with
i.	What makes up civilizations is ideas
1.	Societies that believe in liberalism, sanctity in the individual, scientific method, notions of equality, representative democracy, rule by law, importance of the individual, notion that people can be logical, separation of church of state
a.	These are the ideas that separate Western Civilization from the rest of the world.
i.	These ideas don’t resonate with the Islamic world, hindu world, Christian orthodox world
1.	Those societies are those where people are put on earth to serve God. As opposed to liberal cultures where the idea is that people are put on earth to serve themselves.
2.	Individual Freedom, Governments exist to serve us
a.	These ideas are born from Christian Protestantism according to Huntington.
4.	Huntington divides the world into Geographic regions that he see’s as major civilizations
a.	He believes the biggest tensions are between Christianity based civilizations (mainly Western Europe,United States and Canada) and Islamic based civilizations (middle east and North Africa)
5.	He believes that the nations that are the most anti-western have the most potential for conflict.
a.	If two or more nations co-exist
i.	The clash of cultures in the Balkan states (muslims and Christians)
-Daniel Sulaiman, I dont know how to make it into an outline like its original form =(

Question 5: Less Developed Countries

Why have less developed countries had difficulty achieving political stability and economic diversity? Use what you know about development (and underdevelopment) theory to explain the plight of these countries.

What a developing nation is, according to wikipedia at least.
Add stuff from your notes!

Numbered item.

from google docs

1. Common Markets

a. EU, Nafta, Asia Market, ETC

b. Gave each other certain privelages like tariff agreements, preferential treatment in the selling of certain items as well

i. This gave formerly dependent nations the opportunity to cluster together and form one common market so they could protect each other economically.
ii. This will end up harming The United States in the long run economically and politically

1. Loss of political influence and economic power

c. Countries that have inelastic products like oil
i. Everyone needs it, and they can sell to other markets
ii. Alliances like the one above is not beneficial to them.
2. Overarching organizations that dictate to specific countries rules they have to play by

a. IMF, World Bank, UN Security Council, Opec
i. Sets the rules for how this game will be played

b. Nations that joined the EU for example give up certain powers to play along with the group
i. Outside groups are forcing these nations to comply with common rules
3. This gives ex-dependent states an advantage

a. They have market protection and the opportunity to develop diversity
4. It also left them vulnerable to these other nations however.

a. These international organizations set up the rules

b. The more developed nations are in control of these organizations.
5. Countries that are in debt to these international organizations are held sway to them economically

a. They tell them what they can produce or what they cant
Many countries are forced into being mono-economies

(End Daniel Sulaiman notes)

from elizabeth

(begin Elizabeth's notes... sorry for the huge blocks of text. I apparently don't have the basic idea of note-taking down yet.)

Development, underdevelopment and how they relate to economic diversity and political instability.

The countries that are “underdeveloped” are satellites of developed nations. Satellites of the industrialized, high-producing countries are underdeveloped because they have a valuable raw material, be it oil or coal or whatever, and those materials are extracted and shipped off to the industrialized countries to be processed.
The industrialized countries have: a highly diverse class structure, with elites who owned the factories, professionals who provide services like lawyers and engineers, skilled labor, semi-skilled labor, and unskilled labor; infrastructure that supports industry, like highly technological communications, etc. There is a free flow of people through these levels of class, with an emphasis on advancement through ability rather than class or race or whatever. As a result, there is opportunities for entrepreneurship. There is economic diversity in these cultures, which helps the economy survives in downturns because ti is less likely to boom and bust.
The economies of the satellite nations are dependent on their physical environments. They will produce whatever their physical environments allow them to produce. If they have gold mines, they will mine gold, but they cannot grow apples or whatever. Generally will be reliant on one product, which makes a mono-economy. Highly, highly unstable economies. If their one product takes a hit, their economy will also take a massive hit.
The class structure in these economies is highly polarized. They have the elite who owns the wealth that controls the economy, a very small (foreign) professional class, very small skilled labor class (because in this model, the satellite nations export raw materials and import processed goods, so they don't need much skilled labor. This, in turn, means that they don't have the skilled labor to process their own goods even if they wanted to so they become dependent on the industrialized nations), and a very large unskilled labor class.

Their industries, with the exception of oil for being finite, are not banded together in a coalition and therefore tend to sell at market price, or whatever you can get for it. The raw-producing countries sell their goods at whatever the industrial countries will pay for them and buy processed goods for whatever the industrial nations want to sell them for.

The majority of the people in satellite nations are unskilled laborers. It is important to the industrialized nations that the raw-producing countries remain underdeveloped and dependent so they keep producing their one product cheaply for the industrial nations to extract. **They way they keep these nations in their dependent states is an alliance between the elites of the underdeveloped countries and the elites of the developed countries. The alliance recognizes that they want to maintain the status quo because it is in both of their interests. The elite maintain their unskilled labor force by maintaining the status quo. They do not educate the people because then those people would move up into a middle class and cost more money. They do not need complicated transport or communication systems because all they need to do is keep their workers on the farm. Also, the elite do not want to pay taxes to maintain or improve the infrastructure. So, what we called the “free world” was often ruled by dictators and we were ok with that. These dictatorships stayed in power because they were provided military support by the industrialized nations that were scared of communist revolutions. The maintenance of this system is highly dependent on a common enemy, as evidenced by the fact that the dictators that we had formerly supported are being overthrown now that they can't use the Communist strawman to enlist our help against. It takes on a terrifying note when you realize that Dick Cheney was trying to recreate this model, since he was educated and worked with this model, by saying the terrorists were coming to get us.
When the Cold War ended, countries grouped together by markets, and the United States lost their hegemony because they could not continue to rally their allies around the threat of communism. The markets that countries grouped into, like the EU, NAFTA, Mercosur, etc. gave each other special benefits in order to protect each other economically. Through this practice, the economies of each of these countries became more diverse and less dependent on foreign markets. This harms the United States because they lost their economic and political influence in the world. Oil countries were for the most part sheltered from this because their main product was highly valuable and desired throughout the world. The effect of these alliances is that nations gave up internal control to external forces. For example, countries in the EU have no control over whether they have the death penalty or not., because the EU forbids the death penalty in their country. However, this left these countries vulnerable to outside organizations like the World Bank and the IMF, and this is important to the development of less developed nations. Developing nations gained markets to sell to through these economic alliances, but to grow their economies, they had to borrow money from outside organizations like the World Bank, and to do that, they had to agree to do with the money what the World Bank required. The outside agencies are working in the interest of the elites who were formerly in power during the Cold War by crying “Communism!” They are the elites who put the dictators in power in the economic model discussed above, in which less developed countries are kept down as cheap labor to buy raw materials from, and when the Cold War ended and took away the Communism strawman, then the dictatorships failed and took away our political and economic power from those countries. In response, the elites control the World Bank and other outside organizations to keep their control on those countries. The developing countries would sometimes get in trouble when they borrowed money that they could not pay back. For example, some countries in Africa borrowed money which was then stolen by the elites to prop up their dictatorships with military support, then the country is stuck with the debt. However, the World Bank then controls the country through their debt. Usually these outside organizations (WB, IMF, GATT, UNSC) work in concert.

Failed States: Countries that were orbiting as a satellite and were left out when the trade agreements were made. Therefore their economies had pretty much no chance for stability in the modern world, thus their political environments followed and everything went to shit. Thus leading into the next question.

Question 6: Failed States

What characteristics are shared by the failed states in the post Cold War era? In your estimation, is it possible to fix the failed states? If so, how?

from google docs

1. Indicators for failed states are designed by foreign policy experts, for example the foreign policy journal and fund for peace.

a. Its done on a points scale
i. 10 pt scale

b. There is a great deal of subjectivity in determining the score
2. The indicators are divided into three sections

a. There are a series of social indicators
i.There are 4 of these

1. Mounting demographic pressures

a. They have more people than they have supplies

b. It is population density relative to food and supplies
i. The country has more people than it can afford to take care of.
ii. Haiti has a high score in this bracket.

c. Where people live (where the settlements are)
i. Because of their settlement patterns people could be in areas that are too congested and over-crowded or polluted.
ii. Group settlement patterns affect transportation, communication, social interaction (all demographic issues that show up in this bracket)
iii. Border disputes. Nations bordering a country in trouble.
iv. Who owns the land and who occupies the land. (Zimbabwe disputes over who owns the farmland)
v. Access to transportation/the ability to safely evactuate or leave a place.
vi. Proximity of people to environmental hazards. Earthquakes, Tsunami danger, nuclear power plants

1. Peoples inability to escape these things
vii. Any kind of skewed population distribution.

2. Massive movement of refugees

a. IDP’s are internally displaced persons
i. The internal movement of people as a result of specific areas of violence or turmoil to another place.

1. Creates humanitarian problems for the country itself and outside countries trying to go in and help.

3. Group grievances

a. A legacy of any kind of vengeance seeking groups in which they have a grievance with another group in that country.
i. History of grievances with the larger society and they act on it.
ii. The score is determined on how virulent those groups are.

b. There are atrocities committed on both sides.
i. Generally is approved by state government

c. Scapegoat groups that are used as a common enemy

4. Chronic and sustained human flight

a. Professionals, intellectuals, middle class (the most trained and productive members of society) that are leaving the country.
i. Getting that class of people to go back into their home country is very difficult

b. Economic indicators
i. Uneven economic development (along group lines)

1. Group based form of inequality engineered by the society. For example the caste system in India.

2. Social inequality backed by the institutions of the society that has economic ramifications

3. Groups within the country that are concerned about themselves and the perceived inequality and they act out on these.

a. African Americans reacted against their unequal status. (Country within a country).
ii. Sharp or severe economic decline

1. GDP, Nations Debt, Poverty levels, number of businesses that are failing, number of entreprenuers that are leaving the country, looking to see if there is an economic deterioration.

a. Macro-economic indicators.

2. Look to see if there is a sudden drop in the price of goods.

3. Are they able to invest in their own economy, or are their elites taking their money and investing it somewhere else.

4. Devaluation of their currency

5. Growth of illegal industries, attempts to not pay taxes, working in exchange for food.

a. Causes the government to cut spending.
c. Political indicators
i. Criminilazation or deligitimation of the state (criminal state/gangs running the state)
ii. Progressive deteriortization of public services
iii. Suspension or the arbitrary application of human rights

1. Some people are safe and others are not

2. Rule of law vs wild west
iv. Security apparatus that protects the elites

1. A state within a state

2. The people protecting the leadership have now become a private army
v. The factionalized elites
vi. Countires that suffer from external intervention because of their own affect on their neighbors.

from elizabeth

(begin Elizabeth's notes)

Failed States: Countries that were orbiting as a satellite and were left out when the trade agreements were made. Therefore their economies had pretty much no chance for stability in the modern world, thus their political environments followed and everything went to shit.
Determining the scores for failed states

Fund for Peace and Foreign Policy Journal are the ones who developed and use the index.

Social indicators

Mounting demographic pressures: Population density relative to life-sustaining supplies. The country has more people than it can afford to take care of. Where human settlements are affect the score, because too many people can live in impacted areas that become overcrowded and polluted. Affects social interactions, travel, etc. Border disputes are also included in this, like who owns land. Access to transportation and how people can freely move in and out. Proximity of people to environmental hazards and their ability to get away from those (nuclear power plants are included).
Massive movement of refugees: IDPs are Internally Displaced Persons. Internal movement of people as a result of specific areas of violence or some kind of turmoil within the borders of country. For example, people in New Orleans who moved from the flooded areas moved into Texas and began creating problems there. They have an effect on the part of the country that they move into that creates humanitarian problems for the state and the NGOs and IGOs that try to help. Border problems also arise when the population shift begins pushing up against a country's own borders as people try to get out.
Group grievance: Vengeance-seeking groups that have a grievance against some other group within the same country. People that have a history of grievances against the larger society that they periodically act upon. These injustices can go back centuries. Ex: Muslims in Spain or Palestinians in Israel. The score is determined by how virulent the group's demonstrations are. Atrocities are committed on both sides of the conflict. The violence against the minority group is often approved by the dominant group, and the dominant governmental group often engages in it. There is a lot of scapegoating that contributes to the ongoing violence. Example: Rwanda. Just. Rwanda.
Human flight: Chronic and sustained. Brain drain. Professionals, intellectuals, middle class, most productive and trained members of society leaving the country. The people who have the skills and knowledge to fix the country's problems leave instead of trying to fix the country's problems. Getting the brains back is extremely difficult and expensive.

Economic factors

Uneven economic development: Often along group lines such as economic, tribal, religious or otherwise. A group-based form of inequality that is engineered by the society itself. The society sets up rules by which a group or groups is excluded. So it is basically a social construct that has economic ramifications. Economic group discrimination. Majors: How many people are living below the poverty line, and how many of them belong to a particular group. They use other economic factors like birth rate, prison populations, etc. the same as the poverty line, in that they measure how many people belong to that population and how many people belong to an impoverished group within that population.
Economic decline: Sharp or severe. This category can be quantitative through statistics like GDP, country's debt, poverty levels, number of businesses failing, number of entrepreneurs fleeing, and other macroeconomic indicators. Has their economy been gutted by the world market? Are the elites taking the money from the economy and investing it somewhere else? Is their currency being devalued on the global market? Is the government cutting spending?

Political factors

Delegitimized government: Corruption. The government is so corrupt that nobody in the country trusts the government. Government's elite profits from this. They generally stay in power through force and stay there for self-profit, even through the collapse of everything else. The elite is highly secretive and they bear no accountability for their actions. The government loses the confidence of its people, who don't believe in it or its organizations anymore. Riots happen around elections because people think they're rigged. The government loses its ability to pay taxes because no one will pay taxes to a corrupt government. What taxes are applied are arbitrary, and most people can't afford to pay taxes anyway. People run away from military service or join rival gangs to avoid it. Entire crime syndicates are associated with elites because they are the ones with the money and power. Trafficking of drugs, guns, people, anything else illegal make money for the elites, which makes the people even more distrustful of the government, which sends the country into a vicious cycle. If the government becomes too delegitimatized, it will never recover and is considered a collapsed or nonexistent state.
Decline in public services: Basic functions of a government, like maintaining roads, sewers and electrical systems, are gone. This happens because the government doesn't have the tax dollars to pay people to do them, people who have the knowledge to do those jobs have left, and violence keeps anyone from wanting to do the jobs anyway. The score would be lower if the country's services are bad but maintained. The key is that their services are significantly worse than they used to be. The government is incapable of protecting its own citizens. If violence erupts, the government is not capable of protecting the citizens, which adds to the citizens' mistrust of the government. The government's basic function is to protect its citizens, so if it can't do that, it's really not a government at all. Auxiliary problems include a lack of healthcare services and education leading a widespread disease and a lack of people who can run a bureaucracy. The only services that really exist are only for the elites, who retreat into gated communities to protect themselves and their services, thus dividing the country between them and everyone else.
Suspension or arbitrary application of the rule of law: Coupled with widespread violence and lack of recognition for human rights. If they had a constitution and democratic institutions, their democratic processes are not applied the way they have been written. They are suspended or manipulated to keep the elite in power. Inspired political violence against people that are considered to be a threat to the status quo. Dissidents and people who react negatively to the current government are labeled enemies and repressed. They measure through the number of people killed, disappeared, locked up as political prisoners, or radios and tv stations censored or shut down. Affects human flight.
Security apparatus: Their security apparatus protects the elites becomes a private army and forms a state within a state. The elites form their own paramilitary guards that are very often paid for with state money. The government doesn't trust its own national military or local police and this creates its own personal army that is loyal to the government, the people paying them. The elites begin to form rival militaries that are like rival gangs for each of the fractionalized elites. It is impossible for the citizens to stay out of it, because they must take sides in order to protect themselves and their families.

Factionalized elites: Leadership breaks down because the ruling elites begin fueding with each other. They make government services for themselves and their people. The elites do not compromise with each other, and that's what makes them dangerous. They are not trying to reach common ground, they are trying to destroy each other. One of the symptoms of factionalized elites is Fox News- I mean, inflammatory language. The elites create internal enemies.

External interventions due to their chaos having an effect on their neighbors: Because a state is unstable, it destabilized its neighbors with refugees, illegal trafficking, etc. Their neighbors are not generally happy about that, because the refugees are generally angry, volatile or desperate and thus become a huge economic drain. It tends to prompt the neighbor to invade just to shut the country up. If the neighbors don't invade, outside forces like NGOs and IGOs come in to try to help.

(end Elizabeth's notes)

Question 7: Democracy

What are the features that make it possible for countries to achieve democracy? Consider how the two nations you are comparing reflect some or all of these features.

(Daniel Sulaiman notes start: question 7)

Conditions for Democracy
Democracyß-------------------------------------------àAuthoritarian
These are the conditions for the ideal democracy. Not all countries will have all or any of these. This represents how close they are to achieving an “ideal democracy” according to Sodaro.

1)   What does it take to achieve democracy?

a)    It is impossible to achieve democracy by the use of outside forces

i)     Cant force it upon other people. It has be organic
2)   Each democracy is going to be different

a)    Each country achieves democracy in a unique way.

i)     It will be a representation of their unique country
3)   Michael Sodaro’s 10 factors/conditions for achieving democracy

a)    You can have a democracy without all of them, or some of them. You can have all of them without forming a democracy. If the conditions are not practiced well democracies will not form.

b)   Using the 10 conditions to see if democracies will form from current Governments.

i)     Examine the conditions of countries

c)    The 10 factors for democracy

i)     Have to have an elite class. Committed to the ideology of Democracy     (have to accept its core values)

(1) Democracies core values include

(a) The notion of Freedom, tolerance, and compromise

(i)   Freedom includes tolerance of conflicting opinions

(ii)  A sense of equality (might not necessarily be equal but         are treated equal)

(iii) The ability to achieve non violent                     compromise

1.     Compromise means neither side wins (you don’t get everything you want)

(b) Rule by law

(i)   A country operates under a set of predictable laws that are set by a country as opposed to a single person

(c)  Popular Sovereignty

(i)   Everyone has to have the opportunity to participate

(d) Economic well-being

(i)   Have to have an elite that believes that the distribution of wealth is essential for the country. Equality of opportunity.

(2) The importance of elites in early stages.

(a) The conditions of the elites. Are they in a strong way ready to implement these core values.

(b) When non democratic governments are weakening, the opportunity to communicate with elites and move them towards democratic ideals.

ii)   Have to have State institutions. Features of state institutions:

(1) Even in an Authoritarian System, have to be able to identify bureaucratic agencies that operate in a professional manner.

(2) A part of those state institutions is an independent judicial branch. (a court system)

(a) Have to have a court system that is separate from the ruling government

(b) A judicial branch that is upholding protecting the rights of citizens

(3) Has to have some sort of a representative body that interacts with the executive.

(4) Has to have political parties that are competitive.

(5) State institutions are beginning to co-op the existing regime. They are developing competing parties.

iii) National Unity

(1) Ethnicity.

(a) Statistically in countries in which there is a dominant ethnic group those countries are twice as likely to have democracy.

(2) Democracy can be a way for ethnically divided populations to replace         or supplant ethnic differences.
Creating less of problem with national unity.

(begin Elizabeth's notes)

Conditions for democracy

Because our form of comparative politics is focused on how close to democracy a country is.

Recognitions from political scientists:
You cannot force democracy on a country, it must be organic.

Countries are different and their democracies will reflect their own culture and situations.
Michael Sodaro: political scientist who researches the conditions for democracy. Put together 10 conditions for democracy. A democracy could occur with all or some of them, and having all the conditions does not guarantee a democracy. Quality over quantity. Use the 10 conditions to figure the potential for a democracy in an unstable country.

Elites must be committed to the idea of democracy.

Must accept democracy's core values, which are: Freedom, which includes tolerance of other and conflicting opinions, a sense of equality, and the ability to achieve nonviolent compromise; Rule by law; Popular sovereignty; Economic well-being, quality of opportunity, etc. The distribution of wealth has to be somewhat even.
The elites are important to the fledgling democracy because they are generally wealthy, well-connected and well-educated. Poised to lead a new social movement. When the nondemocratic regime start weakening, the outside forces can move and and identify the democratic elites and start connecting them and leading them toward democracy.

Must have state (national) institutions. While a nation is still authoritarian, it has to have legitimate bureaucratic institutions. The country must have professionals that know how to run the infrastructure. Must have a court system that is separate from the authoritarian ruler. The judicial branch also protects the rights of citizens.

Some kind of Congress or assembly or whatever, and elected representative body that interacts with the executive body is a significant thing. It may be powerless, but it at least it exists. Marks a mindset change.
Competition between political parties. A single party does not count.
Some evidence that the authoritarian regime is becoming co-opted by competing political parties. State institutions become stronger than national government.

National unity. Countries that suffered too much violent strife between different ethnic groups or classes or whatever are too unstable to become a democracy.

Ethnicity. Countries in which there is a dominant ethnic group, at least two-thirds of the population, are twice as likely to make a democracy. Because a common ethnic culture is where the common core values come from.
Exceptions: Switzerland, Netherlands and the US. All those countries have different ethnic groups but still manage to maintain a country because their core values override ethnic divisions.
Democracy itself can sometimes be a way for ethnically divided groups to reconcile their ideas with each other. If an out group wants to become an in group, a mechanism must be in place to do that. Ex: Labor unions, university scholarships, etc.

National Wealth

Wealthiest countries in the world are more likely to be democracies. Exceptions are single-resource countries, like oil, tend to accumulate wealth, though likely in a maldistribution. Established democracies tend to be wealthy and have a reasonable distribution of wealth. Conversely, poor countries have a hard time developing democracy due to having a large lower class that does not participate in politics, having no time or civic knowledge to do so. Basically, democracy survives better with an increase in wealth. Healthy, improving economies can bring with them democracy.

Private enterprise

Economic freedom, participation and ownership promotes political freedom, participation and ownership. If you feel like you own your own wealth, then you feel like you have a stake in the political system of your country and you want some control in the political decisions you think might affect you. Democracy protects private ownership and property rights, so it goes hand-in-hand with private enterprise very nicely. Capitalist “elites” are not generally threatened by democracy because they can manipulate opinion in their favor.

Middle class

A large middle class is required for a democracy. It's very rare for a country with a small elite and a large lower class to develop democracy. Lower classes are easily manipulated and kept down in poverty, but middle classes want economic opportunity and they have the sophistication to make it happen. Laws are important ot the middle class because they ensure protection of privacy. Middle class is the backbone of democracy, and if you want to destroy democracy, destroy your middle class.

Some support of the disadvantaged

There must be some kind of advantage for the poor in a democracy. The lower classes must believe that democracy could improve their situations so they will lend their support to the creation of a democratic system.

Citizen participation

People must feel like they are allowed and expected to participate. They can participate in many different ways, including political parties, independent associations like AARP or the Little League (not organized for a political purpose but makes a political point), interest groups that are created for a specific purpose and lobbies government on behalf of those interests. These organizations are built for a responsive government, so they give the people a sense of empowerment.

Education and freedom of information

More education make more democracy. Education seems to make people develop a taste for freedom, because one of the basis for education is secular humanism and rational, empirical explanations for things. This rationality is closely associated with the right to self-rule.
There must be a free press to provide information to the populace. Newspapers, radio, internet, doesn't matter, but there has to be something.
Access to universities promotes higher education and pass of information, etc. Yesh. High correlation between democracy, a high level of education and easy access to information.

Favorable international environment

Ex: If there is a war going on near an emerging democracy, that democracy is threatened. Instability in the surrounding region threatens democracies, especially fledgling democracies. International Governmental Organizations such as the EU can mitigate these instabilities.

(end Elizabeth's notes)

Note: The "Conditions that Sustain Democracy" handout is different from Sodaro's list of necessary conditions. I'm assuming if she asks this question we will need to list both. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ProletarianSean (talk • contribs) 07:57, 10 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]