Comparative politics Essay paper

The following are three scenarios from three REAL countries in a somewhat simplified way (the people mentioned are real, but not the names, obviously). What I want you to do is take the following three scenarios, analyze them and tell me what you expect to happen with each based on what you know from the readings and the lectures. So your first few pages should be laying out a theoretical explanation for transitions for democracy and then take each case in turn and tell me what will happen.
please complete the assignement using the following readings ( can be found on google).

1. Lijphart, Arend. 2006. Constitutional Choices for New Democracies.
2. Diamond, Larry. 2002. Thinking about Hybrid Regimes.
3. Meisburger, Tim. 2012. Getting Majoritarianism Right.
FIRST SCENARIO:
Population: 40 million
Relatively homogeneous population with less than 5% being minorities.
High literacy rates of between 90 and 99% depending on the area.
Economic GDP has grown from $103 to roughly $5,000 per capita. It now ranks close to a highly developed country. Manufacturing accounts for 30% of economic GDP.
In the past 30 years your country has seen much political turmoil. An all out war between your neighbors prompted foreign intervention and the set-up of nominally democratic institutions. This did not last long, however.
About 10 years after the War, the President—we’ll call him President John—began to amass power and limit the opposition by either killing it or sending it in exile. Elections occurred, but were mostly a sham. Popular unrest was suppressed and a massacre of students followed. This only brought about more public rage, which prompted the President to resign.
Another brief democratic interlude followed, but economic turmoil and fear of communism resulted in a military coup d’etat.
The coup brought into power a powerful military leader—we’ll call him President George—whose main goal was to bring economic development to the country. He succeeded, but at the cost of political freedoms. Suppression, torture and curtailment of free speech was the norm. Nevertheless, the country had a legislature and political institutions that, although not free, developed some expertise in governing.
About 12 years ago, President George started to face more and more popular uprisings that demanded direct elections for the presidency. He responded with more suppression, which brought about some internal division within the military ranks. One day, the guy who was in charge of the intelligence services assassinated him.
The assassination of President George led to the prime minister to take over as the new leader of the country, but again, another coup occurred less than a few weeks into his tenure. This new coup brought more people into the streets and the army was called to suppress it. This resulted in a massacre that killed at least 800 people.
The new President—we’ll call him President James—redoubled his efforts to improve the economy and he succeeded. So much so, that next year your country will hold the Summer Olympics for the first time. Outside your country people call it an economic miracle. The one thing he never delivered on was on his promise to bring back democracy, although elections existed that indirectly “nominated” the country’s leaders. So a year ago, when a student protester died at the hands of the police, thousands started protesting for a change. When President James announced this would not bring any change, millions came out all over the country in the largest protests your country has ever seen.

As a result, the government candidate—we’ll call him Paul—has led the movement to change the constitution, and the rules now indicate that there will be direct elections. He has also opened up freedoms and the government is no longer torturing or abducting people.

What do you think? Will your country become a democracy or not? Will it be immediate? Why or why not?

SECOND SCENARIO:
Population: 39 million (estimate)
Heterogeneous Population, minority consists of roughly 20% including mixed races.
High literacy rate only among dominant minority where it is between 95 and 100%. Vast majority, however, is illiterate and poor.
Economy: The GDP has doubled in the last fifteen years, but most of the benefits have gone to the dominant minority population. Among the non-dominant majority, the unemployment rate is huge, roughly 13 to 16%, in certain regions as much as 20%.
Your country has been independent of European colonialism for nearly 100 years. Nevertheless, their legacy left a minority in charge of the country. This minority has amassed enormous power, and has dominated all aspects of government. About fifty years ago, they began the institutionalization of discriminatory practices where those in the majority are kept from voting or having any political power whatsoever.
That means that your country has free and fair elections, a judiciary that works, and strong government institutions, but only for a minority of the population. For the rest, it’s absolutely discriminatory and they might as well live in some other country.
This has brought international condemnation, isolated rebellions against the government, and an organized political party in exile with some of its leaders in your prisons. In order to deal with the pressure, about 10 years ago, your country’s dominant minority leadership started to negotiate to allow more representation and access to power for the non-dominant majority. They have created space in parliament for the non-dominant majority, but the reform is still very weak. Because your government keeps calling for new substantial reforms, but then falls short of them, riots by the non-dominant majority have increased.
Two years ago, a new President came to power—because the previous President had a stroke—the new President quickly moved to negotiate with the non-dominant majority and repealed all discriminatory laws. This year, for the first time, there will be free and fair elections open to every single person over 18 years old in the country.
Will this lead to democracy or dictatorship? Why? Will it be immediate or not?
THIRD SCENARIO
Population: 5 million
Relatively Homogeneous population with about 7% total minorities.
Literacy Rate: Less than 60%
Economy: Your country is one of the poorest in the continent. GDP has been negative in the last few years as you have been entangled in civil war for over 10 years. There are serious health concerns in some part of the country because of poor access to doctors and health care.
Your country has been free of European colonialism for nearly two hundred years. This, however, did not do much to change the place. Throughout your first 100 years you were basically in constant war with your neighbors and your most stable institutions were the Army and the Catholic Church. So your country has been basically dominated by a succession of dictators, some more infamous than others—you have experienced democratic elections only briefly.

The most despicable dictator you’ve had was probably the one that started ruling the country about sixty years ago. This guy—we’ll call him Roberts—brought order to the country, but also used the place like his personal ATM. You literally could not go to this country without giving him your money because he owned the airline, the hotels, the coffee companies, etc. His empire was estimated to be about a $1 billion a year business. Although dictator Roberts was assassinated, his legacy continued because power was passed on to his sons—first Luis who died of a heart attack about twenty years ago, and then James. Given their incompetent rule and hard-handed tactics, an armed rebellion of leftist revolutionaries began in the country, which eventually succeeded.
About eleven years ago, the popular Leftist Revolution toppled the last dictator Roberts and began to try to rescue the country from crushing poverty. Although dictator Roberts was no longer in the country, however, there were many people faithful to him who began a right-wing counterrevolution. This counterrevolution prevented the original revolutionaries from opening up the country or creating stable institutions (at least that’s the explanation given) with a continued civil war that was at times backed by the United States. About a year ago, the stalemate, led the original leftist revolutionaries to agree to open up the country to free and fair elections. These elections resulted in the choosing of a center-right woman as President. The leftist revolutionaries have claimed loudly that they will respect the outcome, and will work diligently to improve the country through peaceful means.
What do you think? Is this a watershed for the country? And will it result in a democracy or not? Will it be immediate? Why or why not?

Last Completed Projects