This document summarizes the key topics and readings for Dr. Tabakian's Political Science 2 course on modern world governments. The topics covered in the upcoming lectures include defining democracy, direct democracy, democratic transition, five generalizations about democracy, democratic peace theory, republican forms of government, and the similarities between democracy and capitalism. The reading assignments examine paradoxes of contemporary democracy and reflections on the end of history.

1. Dr. Tabakian’s Political Science 2
Modern World Governments – Fall 2012
Power Point Presentation – September 25th & September 27th

2. COURSE LECTURE TOPICS
This Week’s Lecture Covers:
•Defining Democracy
•Direct Democracy
•Democratic Transition
•Democracy – 5 Generalizations
•Democratic Peace Theory
•Republican Forms Of Government
•Human Rights
•Capitalism & Open Markets
•Capitalism
Efficiency
Innovation
•Similarities Of Democracy & Capitalism
•Seeking Market Share

3. COURSE LECTURE: WEEK #5 (2)
Reading Assignments For Week #5
•Course Pack Articles:
“The Paradoxes Of Contemporary Democracy” By:
Evelyn Huber, Dietrich Rueschemeyer and John D.
Stephens
“Reflections On The End Of History Five Years Later”
By: Francis Fukuyama

4. DEMOCRACY (1)
A successful democracy is based on the consent of the
governed along with widespread support. Democratic
governments allow its citizens the right to speak freely and
elect its leaders. A formal democracy is a political system
that possesses four factors:
(1)regular and fair elections.
(2)universal suffrage.
(3)accountability of government policies to elected
representatives.
(4)guaranteeing right to free expression, association and
reasonable protections against capricious government
action.

5. DEMOCRACY (2)
Elites would agree that power and power sharing
influence all democracies. Pluralists would argue that the
subordinate classes are driven to self-organization by
uniting together as evidenced in associations, unions, and
parties. This gives them power although all do not
necessarily possess property, high social status, or
command over cultural hegemony. Elites show favor
towards formal democracies, for they do not see
subordinates as posing much of a threat as their
organizational power base is weak.

6. DEMOCRATIC TRANSITION
TRANSITIONING FROM AUTHORITARIAN RULE
Many researchers attest that transitions from authoritarian rule
have begun with discord emerging from within military
governments and their relations with bourgeois allies. Most
disagreements have been found to be over economic problems.
The push for liberalization and democratization would be pushed
forward by a reemerging civil society that may be calling for
greater representation due to their influences with capital
development. Constant conflict developed fissures with gaps
developing between those groups in control. These divisions
allowed civil society to surge into these free areas, enabling
coalitions to form between soft-liners in the state apparatus and
those in the democratic opposition. Decentralization can lead to
the formation of new positions of power that local elites staff for the
benefit of clientelistic networks.

7. TWO CONDITIONS FOR
DEMOCRATIZATION
Two Conditions For Successful Democratization:
1. Settled borders
2. Popular consensus that supports an inclusive definition of
the nation.
Evidence has shown that nations having more authoritarian or
controlled economies are more prone to failure than the
American economy. Elites show favor towards formal
democracies for they do not see subordinates as posing much
of a threat as their organizational power base is weak. It also
helps that the most powerful members of the economic elite
support the capitalist economic model. Subordinates living in
formal democracies are especially in favor of the current
economic model.

8. DEMOCRACY – CHANGE FROM WITHIN
Arguing that external environments encourage states to
become democratic cannot adequately explain why the Soviet
Union fell from superpower status into a consortium of
democratic republics. Threat assessments from within Soviet
society had changed whereas the external environment did not
change significantly. The only change was from within the
Soviet Union in terms of its ideology, which in turn determines
how threats are assessed. Ideology can serve as a filter of
sorts that helps determine whether a people are dedicated to
peaceful coexistence or war with other peoples. Distributions of
power in the international system serve only as a second
consideration, especially how the international community
reacts to a change in the internal ideology of a state.

9. DEMOCRACY – 5 GENERALIZATIONS
There are five generalization inherent in the comparative study of
democratization that are pertinent to new democracies as well as all
democracies regardless of when they had taken form:
1. High levels of capital development helps to maintain democracy.
2. Political leaders are needed to create and maintain democracies
both in good times or bad.
3. Parliamentary rather than presidential systems seem to be more
successful in maintaining democracies.
4. Issues pertaining to national and state power structures have to
be determined early on for democracy to survive.
5. All democracies, regardless of their age or fragility are never
certain about the future, but share a common adherence to
procedures of governance that should not change.
NOTE: Regional effects in terms of general historical experiences can
help determine whether democracy can easily take root in certain
regions.

10. DEMOCRATIC PEACE THEORY
Democracies have not fought each other not out of respect for other
democracies, but that the threat of a third party helped to unite
democratic states. Democratic peace theory is unfounded, for if it
were valid then the United States would not have helped overthrow
the democratically elected Juan Bosch of the Dominican Republic by
sending 23,000 troops whose mere presence helped to topple his
government. Henry Kissinger would validate this action under the
tenets of democratic peace theory by arguing that the Dominican
Republic is a “wayward” democracy that may be in danger of tilting
toward communism or authoritarian rule. Kenneth Waltz claims that
democracies may currently live at peace with other democracies, but
even if all states became democratic that the international system
would remain anarchic. Democracies may fight as often as other
states, but rarely if ever fight one another.

11. DIRECT DEMOCRACY
A direct democracy requires every citizen to participate in all forms of
policy making. This is impossible in a large nation-state like the United
States. America’s Founding Fathers were adamant about maintaining
internal stability, thereby foregoing direct democracy in favor of a
republican form of government. Ensuring elite gains during periods of
innovation is the best prescription to prevent rampant instability for
they are the ones most threatened. Slow transitions allow enough
time for threatened elites to prepare for periods of transitions. Opinion
leaders then inform the masses about the impending change so that
the capitalist marketplace retains its consumer base. Destruction
ensues if the majority of elites and masses do not benefit during the
period of transition.

12. WHY SOME DON’T EMBRACE
DEMOCRACY
Various reasons exist that help explain why some countries have
failed to fully embrace liberal and free-market reforms.
1. The public may have different opinions about these reforms that
may or may not be equally shared by opposition forces. Those
decisions reached can determine whether state socialism remains
or is replaced.
2. How the transition to liberal and free-market reforms are
undertaken can affect the decision of authoritarian elites to trade
in their political capital for economic gains.
3. The method of the transition to capitalism can determine what
side wins or loses.
4. Degrees of nationalism can determine whether political leaders
are able to hold their society together during the tribulation
transformation to democracy.

13. CAPITALISM & DEMOCRACY ARE SIMILAR (1)
For freedom to rein it is required for the market place to determine the fate of all
products, services and ideas. No interference can burden this process.
Oversight is not necessarily detrimental as is the policy of the United States to
regulate various industries. The death kneel comes when powerful spheres of
influence serve to squash competition. John Locke argues it best when he
suggests that liberalism can never exist without capitalism. This is the
philosophy of Adam Smith’s “invisible hand” where he explains how markets
determine the fate of all competing interests seeking society’s acceptance. We
are today living in a time of unprecedented technological innovation that is
helping to propel humanity further the ladder of evolution. This would not be
possible if vested interests were prevented from pursuing market acceptance.

14. CAPITALISM & DEMOCRACY ARE SIMILAR (2)
John Locke and Adam Smith would agree that there is no fundamental
difference between a marketed product, service or even political idea. All
interest groups competing in the marketplace are engaged in the same pursuit:
acceptance. Companies competing for market dollars strive to offer the most
cost efficient product or service that is also the most innovative. This in turn
encourages competing peers to further maximize efficiency while also
stretching the bounds of innovation in order to offer the best value. Marketing
ideas is in essence the same we have witnessed with political campaigns
striving for societal acceptance. Political organizations seeking for example the
election of a particular individual to office must secure a majority of the market
within a certain region. Competing campaigns offer different ideas to the market
that seek to offer a better value. This constant battle allows all individuals to
decide for themselves what “product” “service” or even “idea” is best. We all
benefit from conflict.

15. CAPITALISM & DEMOCRACY ARE SIMILAR (3)
Let us look at the example of telecommunications to understand the benefits of conflict.
Prior to 1996, there existed in Southern California like most other regions in the United
States, two cellular telephone companies. These were the days of analog
communications, or AMPS (Advanced Mobile Phone System). Southern California was
home to Airtouch and LA Cellular prior to 1996. Both companies maintained prices that
prevented the average consumer from fully utilizing their services, or even purchasing
them at all. Everything changed with the signage of the 1996 Telecommunications Act by
President Bill Clinton. The bill allowed for more efficient use of spectrum, thereby
allowing easier access for companies to compete in wireless communications. Various
competitors entered to compete for market acceptance, requiring all companies to strive
for greater efficiency, while also providing even greater services. Consumers today face a
wide selection of companies who individually offer greater communication services that
go beyond voice services to encompass video calling and broadband internet. The
invisible hand eliminates those companies that do not provide the greatest benefit for
consumers.

16. CAPITALISM & DEMOCRACY ARE SIMILAR (4)
The ultimate nightmare may be the elimination of debate. Many have
unwittingly called for this in the halls of government. It is not debate that
threatens society, but the lack of contesting ideas. Policies enacted to prevent
overly powerful monopolies help to maintain open competition. To have one
overly powerful sphere of interest prevent debate is destructive to the system
itself. Pluralism emphasizes both conflict and compromise with interest groups
engaged in a constant pursuit of power that naturally results in established
alliances to compete with peer spheres that are doing the same, resulting in the
formation of two major spheres. Public policy would thereby stall until reaching
a compromise between these two majority powers. This in turn helps to protect
the majority of those residing in society. Every policy requires constant
improvement for humanity to arrive closer to perfection. Those that call for the
elimination of special interest groups or even the restriction of political debate
are ignorant for this process benefits society immensely.