Download file to see previous pages...
, influential, majoritarian leadership results in superior policy outcomes, Westminster democracies fail to surpass consensus democracies (Lijphart 2007).
On a number of pointers, such as inflation, consensus democracies essentially outperform Westminster democracies; in general, they perform slightly better, which somewhat implies that consensus democracies execute no worse (Lijphart 1999). Moreover, consensus democracies have a more moderate, benevolent attributes: better environmental protection, more welfare support, more foreign assistance mission, lower imprisonment rates, and less exercise of capital punishment (Lijphart 1999).
Consensus democracy has certain benefits for extremely divided states. Majoritarian democracy may be denounced for ruling out nearly half the population from the decision-making or law-making process, as it can exclude 49.9% of the population from the governmental process (Crepaz et al. 2000). In the existing literature, it is claimed that this disapproval is invalid on two situations (Lijphart 2007). First, if the current minority has an actual opportunity of becoming the future majority, then exclusion perhaps is not a critical dilemma, because each half of the nation alternates being in charge, which will have a tendency to regulate exploitation of the marginalised by the mainstream (Mair 2005). Second, if a country is adequately unvaried, then non-inclusion might not be a critical dilemma since the barred interests of the minority do not diverge much from those of the majority (Ersson & Lane 2003). Lijphart (2007) challenges these two premises by emphasising that in several countries, particularly in societies with deep-seated ideological, religious, linguistic, or ethnic divisions, neither situation is valid. These deep-seated cleavages can thwart crossover voting, stopping the current minority from having an actual opportunity of being a future majority (Lijphart 2007).
Furthermore, there is unlikely to be a great deal of
...Download file to see next pagesRead More
Political participation usually describes the level of social involvement of citizens in a political life of their country. This concept doesn’t only refer to participation in voting or having membership of a certain political party. It should be considered in a broader context.
The speech was given by the third candidate, Marine Le Pen. Although she avoided talking about the present European Economic crisis, her speech was received by everyone. She had run on a Front national party ticket. In her victory speech, she talked of many things, but it was only her supporters’ praise that received a good applause.
Many societies today associate economic development with industrialization, although there are other alternatives to foster development in an economy. The history of industrialized nations has demonstrated close association between industrial expansions and their national economic development.
Income may be distributed in an even or uneven manner within a population, leading to equality or inequality in income respectively. Brazil is the largest nation in South America characterized by a huge population. The nation has a large resource base and a well-developed economy.
Since the discovery of oil products, Nigeria’s government has had to deal with several issues, ranging from management to operational level issues related to the oil industry. It has been conducting business with several foreign nations, thus strengthening its relationship with neighbouring countries (most of whom are also oil producers) through OPEC institution.
Political scientists consider it as the domination of few people on the economic resources of the country. This situation is workable in those countries where majority do not have an interest to participate in the democratic process of the country. There are many examples of elitist theory which can be discussed.
Impact of migration on European politics.
European politics has been dominated by immigration. Political parties jostling for power have used immigration as a voter enticing card. At the center of all this is citizenship to immigrants. Immigrants move to Europe with the aim of obtaining citizenship whereas in the early 1990’s they just wanted to be safe and free.
The political rights of the representatives of the minority communities have been subdued. The European countries are democratic countries, and the notion of democracy protects the interests and rights of the local community. The principle of democracy echoes the voice and representation of the majority and minority communities.