JoshiNisarg_FinalExam

pdf

School

Carleton University *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

1100

Subject

Civil Engineering

Date

Apr 3, 2024

Type

pdf

Pages

6

Uploaded by CountPencil2513

Report
PSCI1100A- Final Exam Nisarg P. Joshi (101215049) 1 Carleton University Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering PSCI 1100A Democracy in Theory & Practice Final Exam Submitted to: Said Yaqub Ibrahimi Submitted by: Nisarg P. Joshi Student No.: 101215049 Section: A Date: 19-08-2023
PSCI1100A- Final Exam Nisarg P. Joshi (101215049) 2 Question 1: The course’s discussions were mostly based on the two textbooks. How do you compare the idea of democracy in Dahl’s “On Democracy” with Grugel and Bishop’s “Democratizations.”? What are the similarities and differences between the two and which textbook provides your ideal definition of democracy and why? Answer 1: The concept of polyarchy is Dahl's main premise in "On Democracy." Multiple centers of power and authority are characteristics of the governing structure known as polyarchy. Political authority is shared across several institutions, groups, and people under a polyarchic system [1]. This power sharing arrangement aims to balance and represent many interests while preventing any one group or entity from monopolizing power. Elected Representatives, Inclusiveness, Civil Liberties, Competitive Elections, Limited Government Power, Effective Participation, and Political Equality are only a few of Dahl's key characteristics of polyarchy that he lists [1]. The book "Democratization" by Grugel and Bishop, which focuses on the processes of democratization across many settings, offers a more descriptive and diversified view on democracy. Here is a summary of how democracy is described in their work: It examines the complexity and variety of democratization processes all around the world [2]. They stress that there is no one form of democracy that works for all countries and that democratization can occur along several pathways depending on historical, cultural, economic, and political variables. Global Influences: The book emphasizes how factors from around the world shape democratization processes [2]. International organizations, economic pressures, global advocacy networks, and the dissemination of concepts about governance and human rights are a few examples of these impacts. Grugel and Bishop
PSCI1100A- Final Exam Nisarg P. Joshi (101215049) 3 draw attention to the importance of civil society and social movements in advancing democratization. Pressure on governments to enact democratic changes can come from grassroots movements, citizen action, and the demands of civil society organizations [2]. Grugel and Bishop's "Democratization" focuses on understanding the many experiences of democratization throughout the world, in contrast to Dahl's normative framework. Their method considers how regional and global forces interact, the function of civil society, and the complexity of democratization processes, providing a more nuanced understanding of the difficulties and variances in the spread of democracy [2]. Similarities: Both writings discuss the complexity of the democratic idea. They understand that democracy is a flexible idea that may take on many shapes depending on historical and cultural contexts. Both texts recognize the value of political rights and public engagement. Differences: Dahl places a more emphasis on articulating the fundamental traits of a democratic system and offering a normative framework for assessing democratic practices. Understanding the various paths of democratization in various circumstances is the main goal of Grugel and Bishop [1]. Grugel and Bishop's work is more empirical, and case-study focused, whereas Dahl's is more theoretical and philosophical. Grugel and Bishop take into account more general sociological issues that affect democratization, while Dahl's idea of "polyarchy" places an emphasis on institutional elements like elections [2]. Since Dahl's "On Democracy" presents a single, normative concept of democracy, I will choose Grugel and Bishop's "Democratization" as my ideal definition of democracy. Instead, their work focuses on the many democratization processes and experiences
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
PSCI1100A- Final Exam Nisarg P. Joshi (101215049) 4 across a range of situations. Democratization, according to Grugel and Bishop, is a complicated and varied phenomena that may take on several shapes depending on historical, cultural, and political variables [2,3]. Question 2: Populism is emerging, and authoritarian regimes are resisting. How do you evaluate the future of democracy in the world? Will it survive? Why or why not? Explain your argument with examples. Answer 2: Impact of Populism: Populism, which is characterized by its appeal to the concerns and sentiments of the "common people" in opposition to forces of the establishment or perceived elites, has gained ground in many regions of the world. Popular discontent with injustice, corruption, and governmental sluggishness is frequently tapped upon by populist politicians. Authoritarian Resilience: Authoritarian regimes have used a variety of tactics to cling to power in the face of threats from populism and larger democratic movements. Limiting civil freedoms, stifling criticism, and meddling in election procedures all fall under this category [4]. Democracy's longevity is impacted by a variety of elements, including political, social, economic, and cultural aspects. This is a complicated and comprehensive subject. This assessment is complicated by the interaction between the growth of populism and the persistence of authoritarian governments. I may not be able to forecast the future with absolute precision, but I can analyze trends and likely outcomes using historical context and past trends. Factors that affect the Future of Democracy are Civil Society and Activism, Economic Factors, and Institutional Resilience. And possible results are:
PSCI1100A- Final Exam Nisarg P. Joshi (101215049) 5 Democratic Backsliding: There is a possibility of democratic backsliding or the deterioration of democratic standards if authoritarian governments are effective in repressing democratic institutions and manipulating political processes. Democratic Resilience: Democracies can withstand the threats presented by populism and authoritarianism if civil society stays active, the media remains independent, and institutions preserve their integrity. In some circumstances, authoritarian and democratic characteristics may coexist in hybrid systems. Given their complexity, these systems make it difficult to gauge the democracy's status [4]. The link between populism, authoritarianism, and democracy is intriguingly shown by the political history of the Soviet Union, even though the Soviet system was not a democracy in the traditional sense. The Communist Party controlled the Soviet Union, which was a one-party system that stifled political diversity and individual liberties. Populism manipulation: Although the Soviet Union first used populist ideas to win support for the Bolsheviks, this populism soon gave place to an authoritarian state that crushed individual freedoms, silenced criticism, and centralized power in the hands of the Communist Party leadership [4]. The history of the Soviet Union shows how populist rhetoric may be used to win over the public, but it also emphasizes the possibility that populist movements could turn into authoritarian regimes that monopolize power and restrict democratic liberties. The Soviet regime's authoritarian inclinations eventually prevented the formation of a true democratic government, despite early vows to alleviate social inequalities [4].
PSCI1100A- Final Exam Nisarg P. Joshi (101215049) 6 References: [1] Schmitter, P.C., & Karl, T.L. (1991). What Democracy Is. . . and Is Not. Journal of Democracy 2(3), 75-88. doi:10.1353/jod.1991.0033 . [2] Grugel, J. (2001, December 1). Democratization: A Critical Introduction. https://doi.org/10.1604/9780333679692 (Grugel, 2001) [3] Dahl, R. A. (2000, August 1). On Democracy. https://doi.org/10.1604/9780300084559 (Dahl, 2000) [4] Huntington, S. P. (1991). Democracy’s Third Wave. Journal of Democracy, 2(2), 12– 34. https://doi.org/10.1353/jod.1991.0016 (Huntington, 1991)
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help