Consociational Democratic Regime and Majoritarian Democratic Regime

Consociational Democratic Regime and Majoritarian Democratic Regime

The economic performance, political structure, and stability, form the fundamental characteristics in analysing a countries performance. Decisions made by the government have a significant impact on the economic environment of a state. The role of providing suitable business operating environment falls upon the shoulders of the elected government (Gitman and Joehnk 19). In countries with high ownership of the countries business, may contribute to weakness in the economy of the nation. Limited operation autonomy brings the economy weakness to the enterprise (Thillairajah 109). The government has an obligation of ensuring mechanisms are set to ensure mutual accountability to the investors of the country. The government has the role of managing the economy. Through sustained economic stability, the country’s economic status would develop. The federal government banks to ensure control in money flow in a state. Fiscal policies set by the administration and the government’s expenditure should be monitored. If not checked they would have an impact on the economy of a country (Gitman and Joehnk 20).

Lebanon is a democratic republic in eastern Mediterranean shoe (Krieger 21). Lebanon is governed by a precise form of consociation democracy. In Lebanon, power sharing is organised in a formal and informal arrangement (Krieger 21). The offices of the executive body of the government are reserved for the Maronite Christians, Sunni Muslims, and Shiite Muslims. The speaker, Prime minister and president form part of the executive. The distribution of the parliamentary seats is even between the Christians and the Muslims (Krieger 21). The political situation in Lebanon has often been shaky. Lebanon has experienced both civil and international wars. However, the major cases of instability have declined over the period. The Doha agreement in 2008 has been vital in enhancing political stability in Lebanon. The agreement set the foundation for the parliamentary polls system in Lebanon. The stability of the Lebanese government is threatened by parties supporting Syria and the disarmament of the Hezbollah.

Since 2007, the economy of Lebanon has been growing by 2-3 annually. The economy has been stable regardless of the political stability of the country. The economic sustainability in Lebanon is attributed to remittances from the Lebanese citizens living abroad. Similarly, the good performance in the housing market contributed to the same. The lending policy in the country was vital in protecting the country during the international financial crisis (Krieger 22)

Previously, Taiwan was under an authoritarian one political party system. However, the political system in the country has changed to a democratic system. There have been numerous developments that have facilitated the massive and quick overhaul of Taiwan to a democratic state. The mobilisation of voters and competition between the political parties has become a common thing in Taiwan after the system deconstruction. The stability in the country is however threatened the sharp confrontations between the political parties. The battles have weakened the authoritative influence of the government (Taiwan: Foreign Policy and Government Guide 144). Moreover, delay of government duties and legislative functions has been standard in the country. Foreign trade significantly impacts the economic stability of Taiwan as a nation. The economic growth of Taiwan is majorly dependent on foreign trade. Economically Taiwan competes globally in terms of economic structure transformation (Taiwan: Foreign Policy and Government Guide 145).

The private sector is an important partner in a countries development strategy. Together with the public sector they handle the economic evolution of a nation. The private businesses create economic growth; also they pay for the revenues essential for national growth. If well organised and managed the public activities have a positive impact on the economy of the world. The private sector resources can be mobilised to use them provide vital public services. The services range from technical, managerial, and financial services. Private-public partnerships or links ensure there is a coordinated effort by both public and private sector to provide the essential public services. The partnership always results in an improvement economic growth (Izumi and Shaw 316).

The type of regime in a government has an impact on the economic state of a country. For most authoritarian regimes, there is often misappropriation of funds in the nation. The misappropriation often generates from bribes and lack of accountability (Wright 6). The consequence of this is often diminished foreign aid due to the lack of proper appropriation of the funds. The consequences are a drop in the economy of the country. Because, the expenditure of government is reduced (Wright 6). When the legislatures handle ensuring sound investment, they guarantee a positive impact on the economy. Supervision is essential to ensure the foreign aid is used to develop the country. Democracy offers an option of proper appropriation of government funds. The opposition does monitoring of the government expenditure. Dictatorships are attributed to increased government consumption and lack of accountability (Wright 7). Democratic countries are more economically stable compared to dictatorial regimes as there is transparency in the government operations.

Democracy puts emphasis on freedom of an individual in a political system. It is a system where the legal members of the state are allowed into participate in government policy management. The citizens in the system are equal under the law of the specific state (Flösser and Otto 42). The practice of political rights and liberties for everyone from the core and chief concepts of democracy. Democratic government is a government that permits public participation in elections. The system offers a platform for political involvement and contestation. Free, fair and competitive are the words used to describe the election process (Flösser and Otto 43). Democracy is divided into the following attributes; liberal democracy, modern democracy, and social justice. The characteristics highlight the different perspectives and responsibilities on democracy.

Various concepts of democracy have been designed to manage the system. The first concept is the representative political democracy (Flösser and Otto 45). The concept acknowledges that the citizen as a voter handles limiting and controlling and limiting the power of the government. The second concept known as the notion of participative democracy is aimed at strengthening democracy in social services (Flösser and Otto 46). Consumerism aims at presenting democracy in line with the social services. The concept of participatory democracy is intended to increase social services in social services. The last concept of democracy is the notion of the co-producer (Flösser and Otto 47).

There has a significant change of regimes over the past seven hundred years. Initially, monarchs were the most common forms of governments (Sisson and Mansfield 45). In the middle twentieth century, standard systems were there were Marxist-Leninist regimes. The early 1800s saw an increase in the number of democratic states. The primary growth of the democratic states was visible 1950. The rise in the states was evidence of how policies are generated in many countries (Sisson and Mansfield 45).

The main types of democracies are the direct and representative democracy. In the direct democracy, the citizens are allowed full participation in decision-making. The direct democracy system originated from Greece. In the representative democracy, an elected delegate is selected to represent the public. The people elect the representatives to the positions. The agents handle the checks and balances of the government operations. Representative democracy is the most traditional form of democracy. It is divided into the consociation and majoritarian democracy.

The paper aims at shedding light on the type of democracies that exist. The paper seeks to analyse further the impact of the regimes in the respective countries. At the same time, comparisons of the effects are to be made. Comparison between the consociation democratic regime and the majoritarian democratic regime in terms of framework, economic and political performance will be evaluated.

Consociation as a model of democracy is designed to help manage the historical conflicts of various regions. The model is derived from the Belgium and Switzerland past successes in managing the ethnic conflicts in their nations. The system uses consensus as a way of making national decisions. The aspect of majority rules is not adopted in the system. There is a general feeling that majority rule excludes the ethnic minority communities from decision-making. However in consociation the political interests of the ethnic minority communities are protected. The system ensures the presence of segmental autonomy, mutual sanction, proper coalition and proportionality. Joint sanction or veto accords each community power to sanction or blocks any form of legislation that is deemed unfair. The winner takes it proportionality prohibits all ideology. Segmentation autonomy gives all communities power to perform fully in law making.

Malaysia and Lebanon are part of the countries that embrace the consociation democracy in the world. In Malaysia, democracy was adopted after long decades of dictatorial leadership in the country (Khan 9). The political structure of Malaysia is that of a constitutional monarchy with a parliamentary system. The United Malays National organization and some other parties from the ruling coalition in the country. There are various ethnic groups in the country. Malays form the largest portion of the ethnic communities in the country. Economic performance for Malaysia has been perfect since their independence (Khan 12). There has been a steady growth within the country at an average rate of 6.6 and 5.3 percent. Malaysia has enjoyed a high degree of political stability since the ethnic riots in 1969. The riots led to the creation of the New Economic Policy in 1971 which ensured even distribution of national resources. The government in Malaysia strives to provide a reduction of the economic disparities in the country (Khan 14).

Lebanon is a democratic republic in eastern Mediterranean shoe (Krieger 21). Lebanon is governed by a precise form of consociation democracy. In Lebanon, power sharing is organised in a formal and informal arrangement (Krieger 21). The offices of the executive body of the government are reserved for the Maronite Christians, Sunni Muslims, and Shiite Muslims. The president, prime minister, and the speaker of parliament form part of the executive. The distribution of the parliamentary seats is even between the Christians and the Muslims (Krieger 21). The political situation in Lebanon has often been shaky. Lebanon has experienced both civil and international wars. However, the major cases of instability have declined over the period. The Doha agreement in 2008 has been vital in enhancing political stability in Lebanon. The agreement set the foundation for the parliamentary polls system in Lebanon. The stability of the Lebanese government is threatened by parties supporting Syria and the disarmament of the Hezbollah.

Since 2007, the economy of Lebanon has been growing by 2-3 annually. The economy has been stable regardless of the political stability of the country. The economic sustainability in Lebanon is attributed to remittances from the Lebanese citizens living abroad. Similarly, the good performance in the housing market contributed to the same. The lending policy in the country was vital in protecting the country during the international financial crisis (Krieger 22).

In both the countries, the leading community comprises of leaders and active members who rose against the previous regimes. However, the main challenge facing both countries is the existence of political communities (Paquette 150). In Lebanon, the Muslims and the Druze form two-thirds of the general population. Malaysia, on the other hand, the Malays constitutes more than fifty percent of the population. The population distribution factor has been a strain on both systems of governance in the two countries (Paquette 110). Tension has built in the two nations. The civil war in Lebanon was attributed to population distribution among the ethnic sections. The main difference between the two countries is that division in Malaysia is ethnically based while Lebanon, the group is religiously formed (Sparks and Isaacs 133).

The notion of everything fair forms the fundamental principle of this model of democracy. The interpretation of the statement “government of the people” means, the majority people. The roles of the government are limited to the selected government by the majority of the people. The system depends on the popular election of government officials. The system expects people to be wise in choosing their leaders (Pangle 37). The choice is employed as a mechanism for controlling the leaders. Control is achieved by reflecting or voting out the public officials according to their performance. In the system, elections are used as ways of deciding the policies to be absorbed. In the majoritarian democracy, citizens can control their governments if they possess the suitable mechanisms (Pangle 37).the primary assumption is that citizens are aware of the government and politics. Additionally, it is assumed that the citizens are willing to participate in the political process. The decisions made by the citizens selected by their leaders is said to be rational (Pangle 37).

South Korea and Taiwan form part of the countries in Asia that have a majoritarian democracy. South Korea has a republic system of government. In this form of government, the president is the head of the state (“Political System of South Korea”). The government, on the other hand, is head by the prime minister. The powers in the system employed are divided among the executive, judiciary and the legislature. The president appoints the ministers in the cabinet. The appointments can only be done on the recommendation of the prime minister. Korea is a multiparty system government. Being a majoritarian democracy, the party with the most following enjoys command of the decision-making process in the government (“Political System of South Korea”).

The economy in South Korea is stable and well performing. The success is attributed to an interplay of an open economy (Kil and Moon 202). The government policies have facilitated the improvement of the South Korean economy. The private sector promotes entrepreneurship that brings in revenue to the country. The application of the basic economic principles has facilitated the proper performance of the South Korean economy (Kil and Moon 202).

The unusual economic growth in South Korea has promoted the existence of political stability within the country. The adoption of democracy into the nation has propelled the country to more stability. Reduction in poverty levels, decentralization of the resources and regional autonomy are as a result of persistent political stability in the nation (Kil and Moon 43).

Previously, Taiwan was under an authoritarian one political party system. However, the political system in the country has changed to a democratic system. There have been numerous developments that have facilitated the massive and quick overhaul of Taiwan to a democratic state. The mobilisation of voters and competition between the political parties has become a common thing in Taiwan after the system deconstruction. The stability in the country is however threatened the sharp confrontations between the political parties. The battles have weakened the authoritative influence of the government (Taiwan: Foreign Policy and Government Guide 144). Moreover, delay of government duties and legislative functions has been standard in the country. Foreign trade significantly impacts the economic stability of Taiwan as a nation. The economic growth of Taiwan is majorly dependent on foreign trade. Economically Taiwan competes globally in terms of economic structure transformation (Taiwan: Foreign Policy and Government Guide 145).

The two countries Taiwan and South Korea have adopted a similar model and role for the state. The BAIR model is used in the two nations. The model is characterised with, women exploitation, planning that is aimed over long periods, central coordination of government activities, and movement in industrial sectors is possible in the two countries. Additionally, small expenditures in social welfare are very common. The governments encourage the development of the private sectors that play a significant role in the two economies (Deyo 81). Both regimes put emphasis on the importance of proper education. Despite the equally highlighted levels of growth. The Taiwan economy seems to lead in terms of exports compared to the South Korean economy. The result is attributed to the higher variety in export among the two countries. The level of industrialization in South Korea is significant in government-controlled industries while Taiwan it is among the small-medium sized firms.

One can rightly say various factors have played a role in the development of democracy in these two countries. High levels of economic growth and a market-oriented capitalist economy from the fundamental grounds of the democratic development (Chen 5). Mass communication and urbanization and influence from allies like the United States of America have encouraged the growth of this two democracies (Chen 5).

The idea behind the consociation democracy is primarily addressed ethnic conflicts in any region. Conflict resolution among people of varied ethnic lines is the primary goal of consociation democracy (Jarstad and Sisk 110). Consociation democracy was viewed as a democratic form of conflict management in the affected areas. Majoritarian democracy, on the other hand, was aimed at shifting the majorities in parliament. The primary objective is to ensure the interests of other parties are not excluded from consideration (Jarstad and Sisk 110).

One can argue that both the consensus and majoritarian democracy come in pairs. They are polar types. The types of practised democracies often fall between the two democracies. However, the two democracies have dissimilarities (Bogaards 4). The majoritarian democracy is often characterised by one party government that dominate the parliament. An electrical system that is majoritarian in nature is often used in the electrical system. The majoritarian system is also characterised by a two party system, interest group pluralism, a unitary centralised, state and a flexible constitution. Additionally, the system is composed of a unicameral parliament (Bogaards 4). If the legislature is bicameral, only one chamber will dominate the duties to be performed by the parliamentary section. The system is also characterised with no judicial monitoring, and the central bank is under the control of the government.

Consociation democracies, on the other hand, are characterised with oversized cabinets, an executive-legislative balance, a decentralised state, and two chambers of parliament. The party system is a multiparty system with both sides equally powerful. The parliament is differently composed. The constitution unlike in the majoritarian system is rigid. The system allows for a judiciary review of the government (Bogaards 5). The central bank is not government controlled it is independent.

The major fundamental difference is that in majoritarian the political power is concentrated in a bare majority, while consensus tries to distribute evenly and limit the power.

Economically, Malaysia has strived to re-establish its dominance as an exporter of services and technology. The country is approaching one of the most significant periods of its economic growth. There have been concerns on the over-reliance on manufacturing as the primary financial source. The government aims to improve technology production as main source revenue to better the Malaysian economy. However, the exportation of electronics, oil, gas and rubber has had a vital impact on the Malaysian economy. Taiwan is also dependent on technological exports to support its governmental operations. The country depends on its more capital-intensive and technical intensive industries (Thorbecke and Wan 159).

The involvement of the Malaysian ruling party in the financial policy generation in the countries a negative impact on resource distribution in the country. There has been an increase in the ethnic disagreements in the country governing section. As a result, there are signs of political instability within the factions of the government (Hill, Tham, and Ragayah 61). The similarities are visible with the era of the KMT in Taiwan and the UMNO in Malaysia. The two are a representation of political movements that try to consolidate government resources. The resources are then not evenly distributed among the public. However, such action by political movements has often led to political instability in the countries. KMT in Taiwan is a perfect example. Majoritarian democracy in Taiwan offers a solution to such actions since the public has the power to control actions of the politicians (Hill, Tham, and Ragayah 61).

There is continued alienation of the ethnic minority clans in Malaysia. The rupture is attributed to the dominance of the Malay ethnic group. The effect has been greatly felt among the middle class of all ethnic groups (Gomez 21). The actions have had a negative impact on the democracy of Malaysia. The effects have been the destruction of trust and social cohesion among the people. The economy of Malaysia has not performed to its full potential due to factors attributed to the segregation. Likewise in Taiwan the influential people are known to channel the public funds. The main hindrance to economic development in both regimes is corruption (Gomez 21).

Consociation democracy lacks the values and structures that are necessary for development and stability. The attributes of segment autonomy, consensual problem resolution and equal consideration of the social segments brings equality among the ethnic groups (Karr117). However, there is a risk of social dominance that makes it weaker as seen in Malaysia. Social dominance has made the system not to work effectively in Malaysia and Lebanon (Karr 118). The lack of informality and transparency has been the primary cause of its failure. Consociation often falls out of its main ideologies. Mostly, the accepted needs are aligned with the majority members. Segmentation along territorial dimensions hinders the smooth operation of the system (Karr 120).

The majoritarian model consolidates power in a bare majority. The system is often comprised of one party that dominates the law making process. In decision making, the corporation often needs majority support from the unions and social demographic parties to influence policy making. Time and the circumstances govern its practice. The organisation of the system operations is controlled by political culture and political partnerships (Axtmann 64).

In the quality of democracy consociation, democracy is better compared to majoritarian democracies. In majoritarian decision making is based on political associations. However, Consociation democracy if well managed proves to be very effective to ensure political stability in the nation. The attribute such as segment autonomy, consensual problem resolution and equal consideration of the social divisions ensure there is fair representation among members of the government.

The primary concept of democracy is to ensure there is an adequate representation of all citizens. The officials must be held accountable by the decisions they make. The core principle is to provide the governing process must result in an efficient output of policies and regulation. The principles of government evaluation should be adopted to ensure the proper democratic system is employed. Accountability, representation and efficiency are the primary roles of leaders. Consociation regimes offer stable governing systems compared to majoritarian systems. The rules defined asset governs the action of the governments by the leaders. Consociation ensures proper accountability since everyone is involved. Representation and efficiency are guaranteed as every ethnic community has a say in decision making. However, there are risks involved in this system, and a power-sharing arrangement often tends to be short and unstable caused by group autonomy uncompromising attitudes.

Works Cited

Andeweg, R B, and Galen A. Irwin. Governance and Politics of the Netherlands. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan, 2002. Print.

Axtmann, Roland. Understanding Democratic Politics: An Introduction. London: SAGE, 2003. Print.

Bogaards, Matthijs. Democracy and Social Peace in Divided Societies: Exploring Consociational Parties. N.p., 2014. Print.

Chen, An. Restructuring Political Power in China: Alliances and Opposition, 1978-1998. Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 1999. Print.

Deyo, Frederic C. The Political Economy of the New Asian Industrialism. Ithaca: Cornell UP, 1987. Print.

“Facts & Figures – Holland.com.” Tourism in Holland – Holland.com. N.p., n.d. Web. 27 Sept. 2015.

Flösser, Gaby, and Hans-Uwe Otto. Towards More Democracy in Social Services: Models and Culture of Welfare. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 1998. Print.

Gitman, Lawrence J, and Michael D. Joehnk. Personal Financial Planning. Mason: Thomson/South-Western, 2005. Print.

Gomez, Edmund T. Political Business in East Asia. London: Routledge, 2002. Print.

Hill, Hal, Siew Y. Tham, and Haji M. Z. Ragayah. Malaysia’s Development Challenges: Graduating from the Middle. Milton Park: Routledge, 2012. Print.

Izumi, Takako, and Rajib Shaw. Disaster Management and Private Sectors: Challenges and Potentials. N.p., 2015. Print.

Jarstad, Anna, and Timothy D. Sisk. From War to Democracy: Dilemmas of Peacebuilding. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2008. Print.

Karr, Karolina. Democracy and Lobbying in the European Union. Frankfurt: Campus Verlag, 2007. Print.

Khan, Mahmood H. When Is Economic Growth Pro-Poor?: Experiences in Malaysia and Pakistan. Washington: International Monetary Fund, 2002. Print.

Kil, Sŭng-hŭm, and Chung-in Moon. Understanding Korean Politics: An Introduction. Albany: State U of New York P, 2001. Print.

Krieger, Joel. The Oxford Companion to Comparative Politics. New York: Oxford UP, 2012. Print.

Pangle, Thomas L. The Ennobling of Democracy: The Challenge of the Postmodern Era. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins UP, 1992. Print.

Paquette, Laure. Strategy and Ethnic Conflict: A Method, Theory, and Case Study. Westport: Praeger, 2002. Print.

“Political System of South Korea.” Independence Day Celebration | 123independenceday.com. N.p., n.d. Web. 27 Sept. 2015.

Sisson, Richard, and Edward D. Mansfield. The Evolution of Political Knowledge: [volume 2]. Baltimore: Project Muse, 2014. Print.

Sparks, Chris, and Stuart Isaacs. Political Theorists in Context. London: Routledge, 2004. Print.

Taiwan: Foreign Policy and Government Guide. Washington: International Business Publications, USA, 2009. Print.

Thillairajah, Sabapathy. Development of Rural Financial Markets to Sub-Saharan Africa. Washington: World Bank, 1994. Print.

Thorbecke, Erik, and Henry Y. Wan. Taiwan’s Development Experience: Lessons on Roles of Government and Market. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1999. Print.

Wright, Joseph. Political Regimes and Foreign Aid: How Aid Affects Growth and Democratization. N.p., 2007. Print.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: