Government, State, Regime, in addition to Political System Comparative Political Systems Comparative Politics (Lecture notes)

 www.phwiki.com

 

The Above Picture is Related Image of Another Journal

 

Government, State, Regime, in addition to Political System Comparative Political Systems Comparative Politics (Lecture notes)

Dickinson State University, US has reference to this Academic Journal, Comparative Politics (Lecture notes) Professor Sujian Guo Department of Political Science San Francisco State University Comparative Political Systems There are many things that can be learned by studying in addition to comparing political systems, such as how governments are structured in addition to how they function, the process through which governments interact alongside their populations in pursing community goals, how political leaders in addition to the population behave in politics, in addition to how political leaders in addition to the public think about in addition to feel about politics in addition to how their feelings affect their behavior. By studying in addition to comparing these different aspects of different political systems, we are able so that learn more about the system in which we live, we can also determine which systems are successful in addition to which systems are not. Throughout time there has always been diversity in political systems across the world. We will study them in this section. Government, State, Regime, in addition to Political System Government: government is simply the agency made up of offices through which problems are formulated, agendas are addressed, in addition to decisions are made, which affect the lives of their citizens. The collection of offices in a political system constitutes the government of that system, in addition to these offices are filled by particular individuals who are either popularly elected or politically appointed, in addition to these individuals play various roles in the political process in addition to can shift from one role so that another. (key words: offices, bureaucracies, individual officials)

 Battersby, Mark Dickinson State University www.phwiki.com

 

Related University That Contributed for this Journal are Acknowledged in the above Image

 

Government, State, Regime, in addition to Political System State: the state is a permanent structure of domination in addition to coordination, including a coercive apparatus in addition to the legitimate use of physical force so that administer control over the population within its territory. Therefore, when large numbers of people in a particular territory begin so that doubt or deny the claim of the state so that administer control by the legitimate use of coercive means or physical force, then the existing state is in peril of dissolution. However, governments succeed one another, or regimes come in addition to go, while the state usually endures. (key words: coercive apparatus, physical force, population, territory) Government, State, Regime, in addition to Political System Regime: a regime is constituted by principles, norms, rules, in addition to decision-making procedures which govern the power relationships among institutions in addition to determine who has access so that power, in addition to how those who are in power deal alongside those who are not. A regime is a more permanent organization of power than specific governments. Governments may come in addition to go, while the regime remains in place. (key words: norms, rules, or constitutions) Why we need so that make a distinction between these three concepts? (1) we encounter these concepts most often, but usually confuse them without a clear definition. We need a common basis in consideration of measuring the variables or changes, formulating in addition to discussing the problems or issues. The three important concepts in addition to the clear distinction between these concepts will provide us alongside an analytic tool or instrument so that categorize in addition to analyze different political systems. EX. in consideration of a nondemocratic state in modern world, there is a fusion of state, regime, in addition to government through the ruling party. The ruling party is usually identified alongside the government, the regime, the state in addition to even alongside the nation. They construct regimes in their own norm, ideology, image in addition to need, mold the government in addition to the state itself along lines compatible alongside this particular norm, ideology, image, in addition to need. It is in consideration of this reason that the state/regime/government distinction becomes blurred in nondemocratic countries. By doing so, the ruling class views attacks on the party as an attack on the state or the nation, in addition to interprets all proposals so that change the government as an attempt so that overthrow or destroy the state or the nation, in addition to provides an legitimate excuse in consideration of repression or in consideration of containing social change.

Why we need so that make a distinction between these three concepts? (2) we can tell governments succeed one another, but how can we identify regime changes? This has important theoretical in addition to political implications in consideration of the political analysis or the comparison of different political systems. The first thing so that do is so that identify the defining features of one type of regime from which a transition departs or a change occurs. Principles in addition to norms provide the basic defining characteristics of a regime, while rules in addition to procedures can be consistent or inconsistent alongside the same principles in addition to norms. Changes in rules in addition to procedures are changes within a regime, if principles in addition to norms are unaltered. A regime change occurs only when those fundamental principles in addition to norms change, such as change from a ?nondemocratic? regime so that a ?democratic? regime. (3) Furthermore, the nature of one particular type of regime can remain in place, even if this type of regime incorporate some features of another type of regime. Ex. A nondemocratic regime can have constitutional provisions in consideration of elections, but these are meaningless unless an opposition is allowed in addition to able so that succeed legitimately so that government in an open, free, in addition to fair contest. Government, State, Regime, in addition to Political System Political system is a pattern of political relationships that involves power, authority, or ruling, which authoritatively allocates values in consideration of a society. The key assumption built into this definition is that in every society people have different values such as interests, objectives, desires, resources, in addition to these must be authoritatively allocated or distributed in a conflict situation (scarcity vs. incompatible goals). ?How is this done? or ?how are values distributed,? or in Lasswell?s classic phrase, ?Who gets What, When, in addition to How?? becomes the basic question of politics in addition to the main task of any political system. This question refers so that ?the authoritative allocation of values,? which could take different forms! Classification Schemes in consideration of Political Systems Schemes in consideration of classifying political systems into different types are as old as the study of politics itself. Aristotle?s classification can serve as a most influential classical example, which is based upon two criteria: the number of citizens entitled so that rule ? whether one, few, or many; in addition to whether the rulers governed in the ?common interest? or in their own selfish interests:

Data Center Virtualization: Open vSwitch Hakim Weatherspoon Where are we in the semester? Goals in consideration of Today Outline Motivation Motivation Motivation Motivation Outline Open vSwitch : Design Open vSwitch Outline Applications Applications Applications Outline Implementation Outline Evaluation Evaluation Outline Discussion/Future work Before Next time

Aristotle?s classification Three Types of Political System Constitutional democracy, authoritarianism, in addition to totalitarianism are probably the most common typologies that have been used so that classify in addition to distinguish between different modern political systems. In this section, we will define in addition to compare those distinctive characteristics of the different political systems that distinguish one from another. In order in consideration of us so that do that, we need a workable classification scheme so that identify the essential features of a political system in addition to so that distinguish one political system from another. This classification scheme is the distinction between core in addition to operative features, in other words, core vs. operative levels The Classification Model in Comparative Analysis

Constitutional Democracy Democracy comes from two ancient Greek words ? ?demos? meaning ?the people? in addition to ?cratos? meaning ?power.? So, democracy is defined as a form of government in consideration of the people by the will of the majority of the people. Many countries have democratic governments. However, these governments can be very different in design in addition to function, in addition to democracy mean differently so that different people. Then, the first question is: What?s Democracy? Three Ways of Conceptualizing Democracy 1. A procedural or minimal conception. Among the first group of scholars (such as Joseph Schumpeter, Robert A. Dahl, Seymour Martin Lipset), the Schumpeterian definition is a minimal conception of democracy, which emphasizes the single most important defining property of democracy ? the authority of government derives from the consent of people or electoral participation through free, open in addition to contested elections. Three Ways of Conceptualizing Democracy 2. A substantive or maximal conception. Some other scholars tend so that stress conceptual breadth, which involves a larger number of defining properties intrinsic so that democracy. Under this definition, the conception of democracy embraces effective in addition to responsible government, informed in addition to rational deliberation, honest in addition to openness in politics, economic equality, equal participation in addition to power, social justice, in addition to various other civic virtues.

Three Ways of Conceptualizing Democracy 3. A middle-ground position. Still others, such as Terry Lynn Karl, choose a middle ground in consideration of defining democracy in order so that avoid either an overly narrow or overly broad definition, alongside the concept being defined alongside reference so that a small number of characteristics that distinguish it from other political systems. allow the contestation over power in free in addition to fair elections accountability of the ruler so that the ruled checks in addition to balances in the exercise of government the neutrality of the armed forces protection of civil in addition to political liberty in addition to rights of every citizen. Types of Democracy Direct Democracy ? rule by the many The word “democracy” is used all the time today. Strictly speaking, a democracy is a system where the people rule. Each decision that needs so that be made is made by the people as a whole. Such systems can only really happen in a small population because everyone cannot participate actively in government. Democracy has its roots in Ancient Greece. Types of Democracy Representative democracy ? rule by the many. As pure or direct democracy is impossible in consideration of a country, a workable form quickly evolved. In a representative or indirect democracy, representatives of large groups of people are selected in addition to these representatives meet so that conduct the government in consideration of the people. The selection of representatives is done by election, where a selection of candidates is chosen according so that rules adopted by the people. An election takes place in addition to by majority vote, one of the candidates is chosen. A key so that representative government is that the representatives are, in some way, accountable so that the electorate. Many if not most countries in the world claim they are indirect or representative democracies. If the people have no say in who gets so that be a candidate or did not adopt the rules in consideration of choosing a candidate, then it is not a democracy. Just being able so that vote does not make a country democratic. If rulers are not accountable so that the electorate, there will be no real meaning of representation. Communist countries often hold elections but candidates are chosen by the communist party in addition to no one else can run. Cuba in addition to China are examples though China has changed a lot.

Types of Democracy Liberal Democracy ? a from of representative government in which majority rule based on competing parties, free elections in addition to universal franchise is balanced by regard in consideration of individual in addition to minority rights. The powers of the government are limited by institutional checks in addition to balances, a legitimate political opposition, a free media, a pluralistic tolerance of a wide range of groups in addition to interests in addition to an individualistic political culture.├┐ Central so that a liberal democracy is the protection of civil liberties – in consideration of example, freedom of speech, freedom of assembly in addition to freedom so that dissent. These civil liberties are safeguarded by the ?rule of law? in addition to the separation of the powers. A second key element in liberal democracy is a belief in limited government, the idea that the individual should enjoy protection from arbitrary government. Types of Democracy How can representatives know what the majority of their constituents think about a particular issue? And even if they do know, adhering only so that the wishes of the majority can, on occasion, lead so that tyranny in consideration of the minority (something which democracy is supposed so that prevent). In other words, representative democracy raises a whole range of problems which do not arise in a direct democracy.├┐ Also democracy is dependent upon voters making an informed choice in addition to playing an active part in the political process. It has been argued that representative democracy allows people so that simply vote every five years in addition to forget about politics in-between. Such political apathy can result in very low election turnout. Types of Democracy Participatory democracy├┐ In order so that overcome the problems described above, another model of democracy ? ?participatory democracy?- has been suggested as a compromise between direct democracy in addition to representative democracy. ?Participatory democracy? combines the pragmatic advantages of representative democracy alongside the theoretical attractions of direct democracy. It allows all citizens a greater say in policy issues through such mechanisms as public inquiries, advisory referendums, in addition to consultative bodies. Therefore, ?consultative democracy? or ?deliberative democracy? is viewed as a form of it.

Types of Democracy Deliberative or Consultative Democracy ? a from of participatory democracy that emphasizes consultative in addition to deliberative participation of citizens as key contributions so that modern democracy in addition to allows individual citizens equal access so that decision-making irrespective of their standing in a local community. Deliberative democracy, also sometimes called ?consultative democracy? or ?discursive democracy,? is a term used by some political theorists, so that refer so that any system of political decisions based on some tradeoff of consensus decision making in addition to representative democracy. In contrast so that the traditional theory of democracy, which emphasizes voting as the central institution in democracy, deliberative democracy theorists argue that legitimate lawmaking can only arise from the public deliberation of the citizenry. However, critics have pointed out the failure of most theories of deliberative democracy: they do not address the problems of voting. Types of Democracy Socialist Democracy Socialist democracy includes two variants: social democracy in addition to democratic socialism. Both believe in a form of participatory democracy in addition to workplace democracy combined alongside a representative democracy. Within Marxist tradition there is a general suspicion against what is commonly called ?liberal democracy,? which they simply refer so that as parliamentary democracy. Because of their desire so that eliminate the political elitism they see in capitalism, Marxists, Leninists in addition to Trotskyists believe in direct democracy implemented through a system of communes (which are sometimes called soviets). This system ultimately manifests itself as ?council democracy? in addition to begins alongside ?workplace democracy.? Types of Democracy Social democracy is a political ideology that emerged in the late 19th century out of the socialist movement. Modern social democracy advocates the formation of a democratic welfare state that incorporates both capitalist in addition to socialist practices. This is unlike socialism in the traditional sense, which aims so that end the predominance of the capitalist system, or in the Marxist sense which aims so that replace it entirely. Instead, social democrats aim so that reform capitalism democratically through state regulation in addition to the creation of programs in addition to organizations which work so that ameliorate or remove injustices they see in the capitalist market system. ?Social democracy? is also used so that refer so that the particular kind of society that social democrats advocate. While some consider social democracy a moderate type of socialism, others, defining socialism in the traditional or Marxist sense, reject that designation.

Types of Democracy Democratic socialism is a description used by various socialist movements, tendencies, in addition to organizations, so that emphasize the democratic character of their political orientation. The term is sometimes used synonymously alongside ?social democracy,? in addition to also frequently, this definition is invoked so that distinguish democratic socialism from communism or Stalinist model. Democratic socialism is difficult so that define, in addition to groups of scholars have radically different definitions in consideration of the term. Some definitions of democratic socialism simply refer so that all forms of socialism that follow an electoral, reformist or evolutionary path so that socialism, rather than a revolutionary one. A variant of this set of definitions is Joseph Schumpeter?s argument, set out in Capitalism, Socialism in addition to Democracy (1941) that liberal democracies were evolving from ?liberal capitalism? into democratic socialism, alongside the growth of workers? self-management, industrial democracy in addition to regulatory institutions. Authoritarianism 1. An authoritarian regime is an elitist rule governed by a single ruler (autocracy, tyranny, or dictator) or an elite ruling group (oligarchy, or a military junta). An authoritarian regime rules in its self-interest in addition to places its self-interest above the interests of people. Authoritarianism 2. Authoritarian rulers justify their self-serving rule on a combination of ?myth? (e.g. religious divine right, personal charisma, heredity/royal birth) in addition to ?might? (e.g. brutal force, police terror). In contrast so that totalitarian regimes, they do not claim so that hold a universal truth or have utopian goals or an integrated official ideology. They do not require their subjects so that believe, act in addition to live in the same way. They do not attempt so that transform human nature in addition to society, leaving private life in addition to personal beliefs untouched. What they want is simply so that stay in power in addition to make the society obedient so that their rule.

Authoritarianism 3. Authoritarian rulers in the modern world usually come so that power by force in addition to rule by brutal force. Therefore, they must control the means by which they can maintain their monopolistic power, in particular, control the military in addition to the police. This differs from a totalitarian rule ? ?totalism? in which party ideology in addition to organizations dominate every sector of the state in addition to penetrate almost every corner of the society in order so that bring about conformity of the entire society so that the party ideology in addition to goals. Authoritarianism 4. Authoritarian regimes also have other typical nondemocratic features: impose strict press censorship, outlaw political opposition, control the courts, suppress civil in addition to political liberty in addition to rights, no meaningful election, in addition to no checks in addition to balances in the exercise of government. All these measures are undertaken in the name of order in addition to stability, primacy of economic development, or defending the nation from its enemies. Type of Authoritarianism Dictatorship ? rule by one. In this government system, one person controls all branches of government. In a dictatorship, one person has absolute power. Though there is typically a military in addition to even a bureaucracy (like an administration) in such a government. Usually there are laws which people have so that obey but often the dictator in addition to people high in the bureaucracy or military do whatever they want. The dictator often becomes or tries so that act like a god or a ?cult of personality? so that people will fear him or worship him in addition to do whatever he wants. Dissent (disagreement alongside authority) is not allowed. Examples include those countries before they made a transition so that democracy. Dictatorial systems are often based on military power, in addition to the term “military dictatorship” is used, like alongside Myanmar (Burma).

Characteristics of Totalitarianism 2. An official, pervasive, in addition to exclusive ideology, which is the second core feature of communist totalitarianism, serves as the legitimate source of the regime in addition to the basis in consideration of a new political in addition to social system in addition to a new socialist man. Unlike totalitarian regimes, authoritarian regimes seek only so that control human behavior mainly through denying individuals civil in addition to political rights such as participation in political life or the exercise of free speech, whereas totalitarian regimes aim not only so that remold behavior but also so that do so through the transformation of human nature, the exercise of extensive thought control, in addition to the interference into personal beliefs. Characteristics of Totalitarianism 3. A highly hierarchical in addition to centralized single elitist party is completely intertwined alongside the state, alongside an array of party organizational structures that supplement state institutions from top right down so that the bottom, forming a set of party-state apparatus in addition to replacing so that a large extent the governmental functions. While a single official party may also exist in some authoritarian regimes, the party in authoritarian regimes generally does not have the political in addition to ideological vanguard status reserved only in consideration of totalitarian parties in addition to the authoritarian single party may have so that compete alongside the state, military in addition to private organizations rather than penetrating in addition to dominating them. Characteristics of Totalitarianism 4. The fourth features are operational features or action means in addition to methods by which totalitarianism uses so that achieve in addition to maintain the former three fundamental in addition to core features. These actions means in addition to methods include repeated, massive use of state terror, mass mobilization, mass violence, control over the state, the information in addition to media, education, culture, economy, means of production, military forces in addition to weapons. Unlike totalitarian regimes, authoritarian regimes not only depend so that a considerable extent on a variety of social forces such as monarchy, church, the army, or business, but also leave whole areas of life untouched by official influence in addition to control, in addition to leave in place existing allocations of wealth, status, social values, in addition to other resources, in particular, alongside a relatively strong private property as their socioeconomic basis.

Battersby, Mark Meteorologist

Battersby, Mark is from United States and they belong to Meteorologist and work for Fox 10 News at 9 PM – KSAZ-TV in the AZ state United States got related to this Particular Article.

Journal Ratings by Dickinson State University

This Particular Journal got reviewed and rated by Types of Democracy Democratic socialism is a description used by various socialist movements, tendencies, in addition to organizations, so that emphasize the democratic character of their political orientation. The term is sometimes used synonymously alongside ?social democracy,? in addition to also frequently, this definition is invoked so that distinguish democratic socialism from communism or Stalinist model. Democratic socialism is difficult so that define, in addition to groups of scholars have radically different definitions in consideration of the term. Some definitions of democratic socialism simply refer so that all forms of socialism that follow an electoral, reformist or evolutionary path so that socialism, rather than a revolutionary one. A variant of this set of definitions is Joseph Schumpeter?s argument, set out in Capitalism, Socialism in addition to Democracy (1941) that liberal democracies were evolving from ?liberal capitalism? into democratic socialism, alongside the growth of workers? self-management, industrial democracy in addition to regulatory institutions. Authoritarianism 1. An authoritarian regime is an elitist rule governed by a single ruler (autocracy, tyranny, or dictator) or an elite ruling group (oligarchy, or a military junta). An authoritarian regime rules in its self-interest in addition to places its self-interest above the interests of people. Authoritarianism 2. Authoritarian rulers justify their self-serving rule on a combination of ?myth? (e.g. religious divine right, personal charisma, heredity/royal birth) in addition to ?might? (e.g. brutal force, police terror). In contrast so that totalitarian regimes, they do not claim so that hold a universal truth or have utopian goals or an integrated official ideology. They do not require their subjects so that believe, act in addition to live in the same way. They do not attempt so that transform human nature in addition to society, leaving private life in addition to personal beliefs untouched. What they want is simply so that stay in power in addition to make the society obedient so that their rule. and short form of this particular Institution is US and gave this Journal an Excellent Rating.