Political Science





During the better part of the 19th and 20th centuries, authoritarian regimes predominantly dictated, controlled and influenced the political life in many Asian, Western and African countries. In the modern times however, many countries have displayed examples of democratic system of governance that have not only been successful but has also deterred re-occurrence of dictatorship. However not all the countries have pure democratic ruling because the system that have put in place not only encourage impunity but not effectively let go dictatorship. It has been a great challenge installing democracy in some countries especially those in Africa. The Islamism is a good paradigm that the western style democracy faces a lot of challenges in large parts of the world. There has also been return of the centralized authoritarian ruling in Russia. Although democracy has been progressing very well, the progress may be negated behind by those countries that resist letting go of the authoritarian ruling. Africa for example is a good example of the victims of authoritarian ruling (Magstad, 140). However Zambia served as emulation when they let go of dictatorship and allowed their country to be democratic.

Totalitarian regimes are termed as false utopias because they make promises that are they never fulfill. There is usually complete domination and those in control seem to run everything without the opinion of the followers. Those countries that have totalitarian governments aim at achieving total political, economic and social control of the people. The outright characteristic of this type of ruling is that those in power have the total say over the society and the state in general (Magstadt, 151). These are some of the reasons that make it to be referred as false because it is concerned with the needs of the society but is only concerned with gaining power over those who are in charge. This kind of ruling involved a lot of violence especially the killing of innocent people who were deemed dangerous for no particular reason.

The Russian government was run by a union called the Soviet Union. This union had emerged from the totalitarian regime and therefore it involved domination. The people were tied of having such kind of a ruling therefore decided to fight it. The citizens of Russia were more determined to promote nationalism, a belief in self determination and egalitarianism. They could not anymore take in the fact that there were people like them trying to take control over their country. They believed that it was high time to promote equality in their state and society as well. Russia has faced a lot of rebellion by many of its neighboring countries. This is because most of those countries became victim of the nuclear weapons that the Soviet government had deployed at the time of its reign. There was a lot of tension among those newly independent nations (Magstadt 242).

Economic development and political stability do go hand in hand. If a country is politically unstable, the most possible outcome is that the economy is usually at stake. In most cases it is not possible for a country that is politically unstable to do well with its economic structure. For example the economy of a country is highly affected when that country is experiencing internal wars most of which are politically driven (Magstadt 288). On the other hand if a country is politically stable, the economy is not much affected. If leaders ensure that their countries are politically stable it will not consume time trying to maintain peace but rather use that time to improve the economy of that particular country. It may not be necessary for either factors to depend on each other but each contributes to the success or failure of the other.

The concepts of citizenship and democratic self-government have certain correlations. Citizenship requires that one be patriotic and strives to see his country and fellow citizens develop and prosper. Democratic self government is based on the principle of popular mandate and sovereignty. As such citizenship enforces democratic self-government as the citizens would have their democratically elected leaders to rule their independent and sovereign territory on their behalf, while at the same time maintaining law and order but guaranteeing the same citizens fundamental human rights and freedoms.

I cannot claim to be politically active because basically politics puts me off. This is because most people misuse the positions that they acquire making it look like a bad venture. If people would change their perspective about politics, not viewing it as a base of competition, politics would have some relevance. Those involved in politics always think of what they will gain out of it and not how they will help those involved. For one to be a good leader and citizen they have to stick to the regulations and norms of that state. That is what would increase my level of participation and support towards politics (Magstadt, 352).

In most cases, people who seek political offices and are in search of fame do not do it for the good of the public. It is usually a matter of what will make them famous and what they will gain out of all that. These kinds of leaders will not show that they are there to cause any harm and neither will they show any good that they are willing to do to their followers. Their main aim is for them to gain the leadership and to ensure that they are re-elected the next time there is an election. For a good leader, his or her interest is not whether they are elected but rather to ensure that they fulfill the major needs of the society. Some of the leaders that were driven by the desire for fame include George Washington, Alexander Hamilton, Benjamin Franklin and James Madison (Magstadt, 401). According to them leadership was a way of pursuing fame but at the same time they were patriots and were ready to serve their country.

Works Cited:

Magstadt, T., Understanding Politics, Cengage Learning Academic Resource Centre, CA: California, 2009.