Words: 1562
Though there is no true Iberia democracy, there are still those countries within the world today that reflect various aspects of a growing democracy. Such democratic growth is subject to the influence of political leaders and bodies that are given the responsibilities of shaping their country. When such political leaders are focused on tattling and retaining authority rather than helping their country grow democratically, there is a strong likelihood that corruption and political stagnation will follow.
There is also the possibility that if citizens are given the freedom to appoint dominant leaders or arties, they will base their decisions on such superficial prerequisites as ethnicity or charisma. No matter the country, there will always be a degree of stagnation within politics due to the general stereotypes and political culture of the people that have been developed by the nations past generations. As time has progressed there have been countries that have begun taking steps toward an illiberal democracy. While none of these countries may be remotely close to the U. S. r Great Britain in terms of demagnification, their forms of government are becoming more democratic. Though Iran may be a theocracy in name, its way of government reflects illiberal democratic ideals through their checks and balances on the Presidency, progressively competitive elections, political participation, and somewhat equal representation. Wealth many of the countries In the world today there are heads of government and state that hold an excessive amount of power to the point that their “checks and balances” within government are not applicable to leadership positions.
For example, the third time in office of Russian’s Vladimir Putting reflects the weakness of Russian’s constitution and the government’s inability to provide proper checks on the power of the executive branch. The fact that Putting Is still In a position of leadership within Russia Is not surprising when considering his consolidation of power over the media and politics of his country. There is also an evident lack of “political ideology” within the public that leads too weak system of accountability within Russia.
Yet if he continues to hold so much political power, which it seems to something more than likely to happen, then Russia will continue on the path of an illiberal democracy. Insignia’s corruption within its political leaders also makes accountability nearly impossible In Nigeria as politician are paid extreme amounts of money, placing corruption may not be as rampant in China’s political accountability as the nation has made necessary political reforms to help strengthen its accountability.
While Changes toward further openness and transparency within China may have taken place, these political reforms were done in an undemocratic manner and with the intentions of keeping the Communist party in control. When compared with the previously mentioned countries, Iran’s political accountability is somewhat better in he sense that politicians go through a continual process of approval by the Guardian Council and Supreme Leader.
Though some critics may view the Supreme Leader as being an authoritative figure with no political accountability to a standing body due to his lifelong position, it appears many Iranians are dissatisfied by the leader’s excessive power which makes it possible that the position will soon be extinguished from Iran’s government. With this most likely to take place in the near future, the President would assume the position of having the most power. Yet he would have he checks and balances already instituted by the government which would make Iran a more liberal democracy.
Within all four countries there is a lack of depth in political competition in the sense of “competitiveness” being something that is primarily limited. Russian’s ‘United Russia” political party emphasizes a “pro Putting” ideology to the extent of making all rival political parties insignificant. This makes competition within the country difficult as Putting consolidation of power through the media provides him Ninth an unfair advantage in campaigning for and retaining his current authority Nothing the government.
China’s current level of political competition seems to be determined by the force of it’s the dominant Communist Party. Although minor parties may exist, such as in Russia, the parties are at the mercy of the major party, ICP, as they must be approved by the Communist Party in order to even compete. Irish is brought about through China’s effective employment of authoritarian controls, patriotic nationalist appeals, and economic benefits. When considering the political Influence that Communism still has in China, it becomes obvious that political parties re also rendered insignificant in China as they are in Russia.
Yet when comparing the last two countries of Nigeria and Iran, it is apparent that there is a degree of political competition that is unique in their types of government. Within Nigeria, political competition is both religiously and ethnically based with the inclusion of ‘arioso parties such as PDP, KNAP, and AD. It is obvious that competition is rising Nothing this country as consolidation of power is not evident within any particular political party or individual.
Iran’s situation is different in the sense that political intention is limited by the personal bias and authority of the Supreme Leader. Yet it is also apparent that the Supreme Leader’s authority over political competition has recently been challenged as there have been political uprisings and demonstrations due to dissatisfaction with the 2009 election results. If such a trend of political uprising continues, then the Iranian people’s wishes will be appeased in order to maintain control over society.
The recent success of Mimosas in this election proves that the Supreme Leader is beginning to lose his grip on the political competition of the country. This protest that has been labeled “The Green Revolution” only seems to be growing which indicates that the country is becoming more democratic in the Although all four countries may appear to be suppressing political freedom throughout their countries, there are still those that remain who are attempting to make progressions in this area of liberal democracy.
As Russia fears that there will be a separatist movement taking place sometime soon due to the recent political protests and demonstrations as a result of Putting continued reign as President, it has begun cracking down on the freedoms of its citizens. Demonstrations have been Interrupted by law enforcement and even imprisonment. Russian citizens seem to gradually be losing their right to choose their leaders as Putting refuses to release his hold on authority and extend to his citizens the opportunity to voice their opinion through the medial or any other social outlet.
Such censorship of individual thought is also evident within China which makes the expression one’s personal ideology and thoughts impossible. Within both countries there may be the freedom to choose, yet this freedom of choice does not truly reflect liberty as their choice is limited to a retain individual such as Putting or in China’s situation, the Communist Party. Insignia’s political freedom is also hindered by election fraud. Even if the people do free cast their vote for a certain political candidate, the consistent reports of fraud throughout the country prove that there is no true liberty or freedom of choice.
Nile some may view Iran as also being fraudulent when considering the controversy surrounding the most recent 2009 elections, these reports of fraud have not been fully proven but rather only proposed. Iran’s current progression political freedom is also evident with their extension of the vote to anyone in the country. Although Iran may be similar to the four countries in the sense of political freedom being something that can definitely be improved, it is a country that is gradually taking steps toward a more free type of country.
As one observes the political equality of the four countries mentioned it becomes evident that the countries are attempting to reform their previous attitudes toward those in society who are considered to be “different”. Russian’s equality is focused primarily on an “equality of result”, being the resent of social and wealth differences, reverts the country from becoming democratic in the sense of adopting a system that views “getting ahead” through opportunity as beneficial.
Such a communistic type of mindset has been a result of years of communist leadership. China’s extension of equality is also limited as the one-child policy does not allow those of lower social status to have children while those of the upper class are able to have more children due to their economic wealth. This portrays Chine as being bias towards the rich rather than extending true equality. Within Nigeria there is a lack of quality as the politicians are wealthy well the rest of the country is in poverty.
Iran reflects gradual democratic change toward equality with the creation of “equality Ninth a difference”. Although the role of women may be limited, Iran is beginning to Introduce change towards democratic growth. While there is no individual country that fully reflects the various aspects of a liberal democracy, there are those that seem to be growing toward such a democratic model of government. No matter how much a country strives toward a liberal democratic model, their efforts will be futile.