Research a nondemocratic regime not included in our core countries and answer the following questions/prompts:
1. How is legitimacy established in your country and who/what group has the power?
2. Explain how they maintain their power. Give specific examples to back up your explanation.
3. Which type of rule would you say best describes the type of rule in the country you chose? Explain.
4. Does your country have any democratic elements? If so, what are they? If not, what are some reasons why they do not?
Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
ReplyDelete1. The regime relies on traditional legitimacy as the royal family, part of the House of Saud, obtains the power.
2. The regime uses coercion to maintain their power in order to enforce their strict religious laws. They use excessive force through violence to prevent aversion from the Shari'a (Islamic Law) and sustain obedience. Examples of this is the use of capital punishment for homosexuality and execution for those who deserted Islam.
3. One-Party rule because it the House Saud family that ruled and rules the country since the formation of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. The regime is not dependent on a individual, charismatic leader such as Hitler or Mussolini, rather it is a line of male descendents of Al Saud that rule the country. Additionally there is only a limited number of other political parties in the country but do not hold much power since there are not national elections to give them access to power.
4. There is some democratic elements as the 1st elections in the country were held in 2005 for the elections of the municipal council, which were held again in 2011 though only a small percent of the possible voters voted. The council itself is powerless but it is the first step towards modernization.
North Korea
ReplyDelete1. The country's legitimacy is charismatic legitimacy as the leader is viewed as a God as Kim Jung Un is believed to not pee or poop by many North Koreans. It is hereditary as Kim father held power before he died in the early 2000s.
2. The regime instills fear through violence, like when Kim Jung Un killed his uncle when his uncle committed tremendous crimes to the government. Kim Jung Un and his family are thought to have committed acts of violence and did not feed his people for a long period of time.
3. The rule is authoritarian as he has the final say and if anyone questions His Supreme Leader of North Korea, then he/she will be committed of high treason against the government and be sentenced to death via firing squad, or thrown to the dogs.
4. No, as all aspects of the North Korean life were strictly managed and no person had a say in any of the social issues that were plaguing his country. He wants to maintain his godlike power over the people of North Korea.
Zimbabwe
ReplyDelete1. Robert Mugabe's regime relies on charismatic legitimacy, because his supporters see him as a hero trying to eradicate the forces of imperialism in Africa. His party, the ZANU-PF, currently holds power, although some intellectuals believe that it is the Zimbabwe military that actually controls Mugabe and his party.
2. Mugabe retains his power primarily through violence. For example, during the 2008 elections, he subjected rival party members to arrest, imprisonment, and torture. One example is the death of Dadirai Chipiro, the wife of a political opponent. Her hands and feet were cut off and she was burned alive.
3. Zimbabwe is best described as an Illiberal Democracy, as there are elections, but they are most likely rigged due to skewed and often delayed results, as well as violence. It is no longer a single party state, since Mugabe was forced to share power with the MDC. However, there is continued violence against members of the MDC. Speculations exist as to whether or not the military is secretly controlling Mugabe's actions.
4. There are elections in Zimbabwe, but they are very corrupt. This is because of Mugabe's desire to retain power.
Vatican City
ReplyDelete1. The regime is based on traditional legitimacy. The Pope, head of the Roman Catholic Church, is also the head of the political hierarchy as the only absolute monarch in Europe.
2. The Pope maintains his power through a traditional authority of election by the College of Cardinals. The pope is considered to be the successor of Peter, who was the first pope chosen by Jesus Christ, founder of Christianity. A two-thirds supermajority vote is required to choose a new Pope in the event of a death or resignation. When Pope Benedict XVI resigned in 2013, Pope Francis was chosen as the successor by the papal conclave.
3. Vatican City operates under monarchial rule. All power is vested in the Pope only, who not only acts as the leader of the civilians but also the leader of the Roman Catholic people. The Pope influences the followers of the Catholic faith; in that respect, the state as well as society are subject to the ruler.
4. There are no democratic elements in the Vatican City government. The College of Cardinals elects the Pope, who in turn appoints the legislative and executive authority. There is no need for democratic elements because the government is believed to be working under the guidance of God.
Cuba
ReplyDelete1. In Cuba, the legitimacy was established through a charismatic leader in Fidel Castro after the overthrow of Batista. Now he has recently transferred his role to his brother Raul.
2. Fidel Castro has primarily maintained his power through coercion and corporatism. After he had risen to power, Castro began executing Batista's supporters and imprisoning without cause many of his opposition. Also, there is only one state-sponsored union that labor can organize under. All other unions are outlawed.
3. Though much of the power lies with Castro, Cuba can de described as being governed under a one-party rule. The communist party is the dominant party within the state, and whoever opposes it is likely to be persecuted. This has also allowed for Fidel to be able to shift the power over to his brother Raul.
4. The national legislature is said to be elected by the people every 5 years with the purpose of ratifying executive decisions. However, Cuba is still vastly criticized for being a dictatorship and an authoritarian regime with the power being until recently mostly centralized under Fidel Castro.
Laos
ReplyDelete1. In Laos, the legitimacy was instilled through charismatic leaders when the North Vietnamese invaded in support of the Pathet Lao, with soviet union support(Stalin). Eventually leading to the overthrow of the royalist Lao government in 1974, and then having Kaysone Phomvihane rule the Pathet Lao government.
2. Power has been maintained by a series of wars between the 1950s-1980s with the royalist Lao government. The Pathet Lao had the support of North Vietnam, the Soviet Union and other communist countries. It now holds the support of the other four currently communist coutries: China, Cuba, Vietnam, and North Korea.
3. One-Party rule because there is only one legitimate poilitical party, the Lao People's Revolutionary Party (LPRP).
4. There are technically elections every five years for the 132 seats in the national assembly, however, the assembly signs into law everything the executive branch presents. Also, the elections do not tend to be democratic in nature from an American perspective. There tends to be a lack of democracy in order to maintain one-party rule (to keep from the creation of opposition parties).
Vietnam
ReplyDelete1. The legitimacy was first established through the charismatic leadership of Ho Chi Minh who was supported widely by the people of Vietnam. Now, the leader is Prime Minister Nguyễn Tấn Dũng.
2. The Vietnamese government maintains it's power by having a Marxist-Lenist single party state. The state constitution of Vietnam asserts the Communist Party of Vietnam into everything such as government, politics and society. Additionally any political party must be endorsed by the Communist Party such as the Vietnamese Father Front.
3. In Vietnam, it is definitely a one-party rule due to the restriction on additional parties unless they are affiliated with the Communist Party in some way, eliminating any possible type of competition.
4. There seems to be no democratic elements within Vietnam due to the extremely strong centralized government. Instead of having the people elect the government ministers, they are chosen by the National Assembly of Vietnam.
Qatar
ReplyDelete1. Traditional legitimacy is established where the absolute monarch has control of the power in the country. These monarchs come from the Al-Thani dynasty who founded Qatar in 1878.
2. Power is maintained through the use of Sharia law that prohibit alcohol consumption and illicit sexual relations which is punishable by flogging. Also blasphemy is punishable by up to seven years in prison which prevents people from speaking badly about the government.
3. Qatar is under authoritarian rule because all government affairs are determined by the monarch. Political parties are forbidden and parliamentary elections have been postponed indefinitely.
4. There appear to be no democratic elements in Qatar because all of the government is controlled by the monarchy and there is no transparency regarding public decisions and policy.
Country: Republic of Uzbekistan
ReplyDelete1. Legitimacy is established through the charisma of the country's president Islom Karimov as well as the traditional legitimacy of a single-party rule.
2. In order to understand modern Uzbekistan, it is necessary to understand its history. The Soviet Union's communist party dominated Uzbek politics for almost a century showing the continual practice of having a single party controlling the entire government with the executive branch having the most power.
3. Uzbekistan has a One-Party rule of the People's Democratic Party of Uzbekistan (PDPU), the former Soviet Communist Party, under the leadership of President Islam Karimov. The government is able to maintain power by restraining public assembly, opposition parties, and the media.
4. Uzbekistan does have elections occasionally, but the results are always the same: Islom Karimov wins by a large margin (at least 80%) because the opposing parties who have the most support are not allowed to register for the ballot. In this way, the elections are rigged and therefore Uzbekistan is very far from a democracy.
United Arab Emirates
ReplyDelete1) The UAE has a traditional legitimacy in that positions. Of leadership are hereditary and they have a monarchical system.
2) Power is maintained due to the nation not being renowned for their military through their abundance in natural wealth. As it pertains to foreign treats power is maintained through alliances. Domestic power however is maintained though the control of money by the government.
3) The UAE would be considered to be under an authoritarian rule as a result of all power being held between the president and the prime minister
4) No my country doesn't have elections due to positions being acquired hereditarily. One reason they do not have elections is because of the need to keep their economic wealth central to the government and the constant changing of leaders can skew this control.
Swaziland
ReplyDelete1. It follows traditional legitimacy where the Ngwenyama (lion) and Ngwenyama (king) is the head of state, currently King Mswati III. The combination of those two entities create unity in the nation.
2. The regime maintains power using personality cult. The king is seen as the national head of the state and usually is ruled with his mother who is seen as the spiritual head of state. The citizens spiritually believe in their king, and with the king and his mother, unity is also created.
3. Swaziland has a one party type of rule where the king is one who chooses some of the members of parliament while the others are elected. There are no set parties in the government, instead, everyone who is elected is part of the parliament (the senate of House of Assembly)
4. There are some democratic elements such as elections from each of the chiefdoms. Winners from the chiefdoms come together and do another election to see who goes to the House of Assembly in Parliament. Although some of the seats are appointed by the King, the rest are elected from the chiefdoms.
Japan
ReplyDelete1. The legitimacy in Japan is established through the rational-legal legitimacy which the Diet (Japan’s national parliament) elects the prime minister through a system of highly institutionalized laws and procedures.
2. They maintain power through the establishment of the three branches of government: legislative or Diet that is responsible for law-making process, executive that leads the cabinet of ministers of state and judiciary power. They also maintain power through the municipal governments that bring them close to the people and providing services to the public.
3. One-party rule best describes Japan which the Liberal Democratic Party is the biggest and most powerful party in the Diet with the prime ministers selected from the party. Therefore, it is the dominant party and governs Japan in every aspect.
4. Japan does have some democratic elements. The constitution established in 1947 addresses the sovereignty of people and fundamental human rights. Also, laws were established which all Japanese citizens can vote in elections after age of 20. The heads of local governments are also directly chosen by people, representing another democratic element.
Thailand
ReplyDelete1. There is currently no legitimacy in the Thai government, but a charismatic legitimacy can be argued because General Prayuth was voted unanimously as the new prime minister as there was recently a coup that overthrew the government, and it is currently ruled by a military junta. They also created an interim constitution granting itself amnesty and sweeping power.
2. They maintain their power through force and martial law. They have a nationwide curfew, banned political gatherings, censored the internet, took control of the media, and arrested politicians and enemies of the regime.
3. The rule in Thailand is currently a military rule, as the army had a successful coup and is the National Council for Peace and Order.
4. There are no democratic elements in Thailand as the military is ruling and they've declared martial law and censored everything, as well as arrested political opponents.
Iraq
ReplyDelete1. Iraq runs under traditional legitimacy. The president, Fuad Masum, is the head figure and the prime minister, Haider al-Abadi, is the ruler of the country.
2. Iraq maintains its power through strict and sometimes violent rule. They are part of the Arab League since 1945 and also gained power through invaded Palestine in 1948. Saddam Hussein’s rule caused Iraq to maintain power violently and giving a negative connotation to the country to many people today. Abuse of human rights and terrorism kept Iraq’s power and also allows them to have the upper hand due to their abundance of oil that the rest of the world needs.
3. Iraq has an authoritarian rule since all power is given and shared between the president and prime minister.
4. Iraq does not have any democratic elements. I look at Iraq to be strongly non democratic due to their extreme authoritarian government. They are a non-democratic country because they support the idea of minimal to no equality, lack of personal freedom and rights and these ideas plus more are instilled into not only the government officials but also to the Iraqi citizens. The country is also strongly Muslim. They embrace the religion through everything they do whether it be right or wrong. The force of one religion amongst a whole country would be hard to change.
Brunei
ReplyDelete1) There is traditional legitimacy in Brunei because the country is governed by the national tradition of the Malay Islamic Monarchy that has been in place for a long time. This gives the Sultan full executive authority.
2) One way Brunei maintains power is through media censorship and propaganda. For example movies like The Davinci Code and the Passion of Christ have been banned because of their content.
3)Brunei has an absolute monarchy because the King, or Sultan acts as head of state and head of government.
4)Brunei does not show any democratic feautures.
This is because the Sultan has full authority and appoints and presides over the councils he is advised by. This is probably so they can maintain power and reduce opposition in the government.There are no direct elections as well, most of the power is in the royal family's hands.