Russia would be best classified under an illiberal democracy. The citizens vote on one party with a list of regional representatives. Citizens are free to choose between multiple party's that suits their political opinions. Russia has yet to experience a real transfer of power from one political party to another so many citizens appreciate how it’s currently operating. Along with a free and fair election, an illiberal democracy must have its government powers unchecked. There hasn't been any limit on how much power Russia's government can hold. It’s hard for a government to exert its power when oligarchs have so much political influence and eventually corruption starts to take place with government officials because there power is being used inappropriately. Lastly, civil rights and liberties are partly honored, if at all. Quality of life in Russia has always been poor living standards seem to never get better. There’s an uncertain future for Russia and its government seems to never pay attention to the quality of living. Human rights advocates protest strongly raising question about the depth of Russia's commitment to liberal democratic values.
The government used its power to carry out political systems that never seemed to move forward into a democracy. Russia's transition was a learning process on what didn't work. It seemed like they were trying to avoid the transition to democracy the time. For example, during the Stalin Revolution there were an extensive amount of media censorship and state control on political opposition. Anyone deviating from the authorized interpretation could be charged with treason. This control enabled the people to voice their opinions. If anything this slowed the process to becoming an illiberal ...
... middle of paper ...
...st factors that lead Mexico into a democracy was the creation of The Mexican Constitution of 1917 which established formal set of political institutions and guaranteed citizens a range of progressive social and economic rights. Although at this point the constitution did not offer suffrage for women, they had to wait until 1953. Land and claim rights were also promised in the constitution. Most of these lands were distributed in the form of ejidos to pheasant groups and ejidatarios were the ones that acquired ejido lands. The citizens appreciated this land distribution because it was a chance for them to start a new living of life. Another political factor was the North American Free Trade Agreement, which committed Mexico, the United States, and Canada to the elimination of trade barriers among them. This helped the country by increasing its trade and the economy.
...oved to be singularly influential and daunting. This is, perhaps, the greatest obstacles to achieving true democracy in Russia—the authoritarian and repressive traditions that refuse to die out with the passage of time.
...t up. This group of young leaders believed that they could assume their proper role in Mexican politics once President Díaz announced publicly that Mexico was ready for democracy. Although the Mexican Constitution called for public election and other institutions of democracy, Díaz and his supporters used their political and economic resources to stay in power indefinitely.”
The history of political instability in Mexico and its need for revolution is very complex and dates back to the colonization of Mexico by the Spaniards in the 1500s. However, many aspects of the social situation of Mexico when the Revolution broke out can be attributed to the thirty-year dictatorship of President Porfrio Diaz, prior to 1911. The Revolution began in November of 1910 in an effort to overthrow the Diaz dictatorship. Under the Diaz presidency, a small minority of people, primarily relatives and friends, were in ...
Civil war had destroyed both social stability and the economy. Also, few people had enough political experience to bind Mexico together. The first constitution, spread in 1824, giving state legislators the power to elect both the president and the vice president. A result of this constitution, caused a series of weak presidents struggled to form an effective government.
"For hundreds of years, dictators have ruled Russia. Do they still? In the late 1980s, Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev launched a series of political reforms that eventually allowed for competitive elections, the emergence of an independent press, the formation of political parties, and the sprouting of civil society. After the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, these proto-democratic institutions endured in an independent Russia" (McFual). However history has shown how Russia has always been an anti-democratic country; power having shifted to authoritarian rule under both the Communists and the Russian Tsars. Under the previous authoritarian rule, Russian citizens were stripped of their rights and freedoms, but in t...
Mexico has endured political conflicts due to differences between liberals and conservatives. The weakness of the country began after the war, which led many to seek modernization of Mexico. The result of seeking modernization was an unwillingness to compromise and settle a constitution that would appease both parties.
It was said that the educated people, the contact with other countries should contribute to the government policy. As said in document 1 , "By 1900 there were political parties raging from far right defenders of autocracy and russian power over all other ethnicities, to far left revolutionaries calling for the overthrow of the government." The government there was autocratic, which was when the tsar had all the power/control of the government. Another cause for the Russian Revolution was the outbreak of WW1. "Even before the war urban workers all over the Russian empire had been increasingly radical, but the war brought the government's incompentence and the people's grievances into sharper relief. The first months of the war were a disaster for Russia." It is much easier to overthrow a government than to try andcreate a new government. As said in document 2,"Chaos, conflict, uncertaunty; more violence are much more common and often led to centralized, authoritarian governments." There was celebration all over the streets after the indication that the tsar was overthrown after 300 years of a tsarist government ruling. "The problem was that, after the party, governing problems arose immediately.
One of the factors that led to the Mexican independence is the socio-political conditions of the native Mexicans after being invaded by Spain. After the fall of Tenochtitlan, and for the three hundred years that followed, indigenous
Czarist Government: Czarist government is similar to an autocratic or dictatorial way of government. This is how Russia was ruled in the 1800’s and early 1900’s. This method of government was important to the Russian revolution because the revolution “really came out of the failure of the czarist government to reform in the several decades that preceded the 1917 events” (Russian revolution).
Mexico struggled to achieve a durable democracy due to a combination of racial prejudices and religious problems that caused economic problems and fighting. The casta system, which once separated Mexico into various classes depending on the color of people’s skin, caused lasting damages, even after it was revoked. The king of Spain created a system in which the king gave certain subjects ownership of the land, and control of the native people within the land. The Church took economic benefits that would have been better suited to helping the people in Mexico and used them for their own benefit. Economic struggles for adequate money were key sparks in igniting the Mexican revolution.
Mexico declared its independence from Spain in Sept, 16, 1810, and for the next 100 years what followed was a period of political instability of rule under monarchies, federal republics and dictatorships. Finally in 1910, a revolt on the autocracy under Porfirio Diaz led to the start of the M...
...cy because there were some changes within the social hierarchy, and because Mexico was free from Spain. This lack of assaulting dependency is important because it created more wars after the early national period.
Over the next few years, Russia went through a traumatic time of civil war and turmoil. The Bolsheviks’ Red Army fought the white army of farmers, etc. against Lenin and his ways. Lenin and the Bolsheviks won and began to wean Russia of non-conforming parties eventually banning all non-communist as well as removing an assembly elected shortly after the Bolshevik’s gain of power. Lenin’s strict government, however, was about to get a lot stricter with his death in 1924.
The current state of Mexican democracy is seemingly difficult to analyze because Mexico is still a relatively new democracy. The Mexican government has come a long way and still has a lot to work on order to improve its democracy. The Mexican government has been successful at upholding substantive and procedural methods of government yet it has been failing in participation and responsiveness. The current government allows elections and reforms to be implemented when civil society has called for them, but civil society, although becoming more active,has not been able to keep the privileged elite political class accountable (Nytimes 1). The electoral reform laws that took place in 1994-1996 allowed for better transparency and fairness while voting (Stoner and Mcfaul 263). These laws as well as the devaluation of the peso had voters turn against the PRI which inevitably let voters to form a new party (Stoner and Mcfaul 262). The success of a new party in 2000 allowed for a democratic transition but the inertia has been lost and democratic consolidation isn’t possible unless certain problems are addressed.
The Russian democracy came about a half a century down the road. When communism ultimately fell in the Soviet Union, a popular figure under Gorbachev came into power under a fresh, democratic framework. His name was Boris Yeltsin. He put together a new constitution, based on the Constitution of France, that gave many formal powers to the executive branch. It allows for a dual executive; a president and a prime minister. The president is the commander-in-chief of the armed forces and is empowered to rule by decree in a state of emergency (Palmer 334). He is also tied into the bureaucracy with the power to nominate and remove other bureaucrats and department heads from office. He nominates a prime minister and must approve the Cabinet.