The fourth largest country in the world by population and the fifteenth largest by size is the subject of this question.
It's the largest Muslim country in the world.
Some context can be provided by looking at the presidential elections.
Indonesia gained its independence in 1945.
The attempts to build a democratic system were short lived.
In 1957, President Sukarno dismantled liberal democracy.
President Suharto ruled Indonesia for more than 40 years while presiding over widespread corruption and nepotism.
In the late 1990s an economic crisis in Asia devastated Indonesia's economy, weakened the regime's legitimacy, and led to protests for greater democracy.
The movement included the devolution of power to local governments, the creation of a strong constitutional court, and open elections.
One obvious measure is elections.
Over 500 local assembly elections have been held.
Elections are not the only way to evaluate democracy.
Some concerns emerge if we expand our analysis.
Indonesia's elections are marred by vote buying and electoral fraud, consistent with the high level of overall corruption that continues to plague the country.
The legitimacy of the major political parties has been undermined by this situation.
The parties are not clearly defined by their ideological differences as opposed to their association with powerful families.
The lack of ideological clarity makes it difficult for the public to distinguish between the parties.
Civil society has been helped by the fact that activists have emerged to advance reforms, such as reducing corruption and increasing election transparency.
Civic organization is often seen as critical to fostering public participation, and it is often the absence of such organizations that undermines new democracies.
A weak party system with a strong civil society provides a mixed picture of democratic progress in Indonesia.
The country's democratic institutionalization is dependent on a third institution.
Indonesia's executive takes the form of a directly elected president with a two-term limit.
The first democratic elections for this office took place in 2004.
The victor was a former general.
In order to move the country away from its authoritarian past and reduce the traditional role of the military in politics, the presidential elections were critical.
There were two very different candidates in the elections.
The former mayor of Jakarta was a successful businessman.
He portrayed himself as a hands- on leader with extensive political experience when campaigning on the need to reduce poverty and corruption.
His opponent, Prabowo Subianto, had a different campaign.
In 1998, Subianto commanded the forces involved in the suppression of anti- Suharto protests.
Subianto presented himself as a charismatic leader similar to a modern day Sukarno.
Subianto was seen as a long shot for the presidency early in the campaign.
He gained ground thanks to a message of nationalism and sectarianism that took aim at the small Christian and Hindu communities.
This strategy did not work.
In the July elections, Widodo gained 53 percent of the vote and voter turnout was 70 percent.
There are still questions about Indonesia's long- term democratic institutionalization despite the break with the Suharto era.
Our discussion of Pakistan in Chapter 2 shows how difficult it is for the government to control the military.
The legal structure is corrupt and ineffective, and the president has made little headway in establishing the rule of law.
In spite of the country's legal flaws, the President has lifted the country's moratorium on the death penalty, approved the execution of individuals for drug traffickers, and has proposed expanding the death penalty even further.
The consolidation of Indonesia's democratic institutions may have been accompanied by an alarming decline in civil liberties.
Explain democracy's components.
There are different explanations for why democracy has emerged in some cases and not in others.
Evaluate the benefits and differences of electoral systems.
societies have not been organized in a way that is democratic for most of human history Revolution, war, and the destruction of rival ideologies paved the way for democracy around the globe.
The spread of this political system may appear natural to those already living in a democratic society.
The chapter will discuss the origins, structures, strengths, and weaknesses of democracy.
We will begin by defining democracy.
We will look at the various institutions that represent the core "goods" of democracy: participation, competition, and liberty.
There is no one relationship among these three.
Different democracies shape freedom, equality, and power.
As we move into the next set of chapters, we will consider some of the challenges to democracy around the world.
We need to nail down our terminology.
A university is not a democratic institution, but that doesn't mean it is deficient.
Because of the word's symbolism, many individuals and organizations describe themselves as democratic, but in very different ways.
For communists democracy means collective equality and not individual freedom, we noted in Chapter 3.
China sees themselves as a true democracies, which include full employment, universal education, and the elimination of economic classes.
Democracy in the United States and Europe is seen as little more than a struggle by a small group of people.
Communism, with its single- party control and lack of civil liberties, is seen as anything but democratic by the capitalist countries.
Each side uses different criteria to define democracy.
It is possible to go back to the beginning of the word.
We can say that democracy is a system in which political power resides with the people.
The people can either use that power directly or indirectly.
The exercise of power can be done through means such as voting and elections, competition between political parties, and freedom of speech or assembly.
The definition emphasizes individual freedom and is in keeping with the ideology of liberalism.
Liberal democracies are based on the ideology of liberalism with an emphasis on individual rights and freedoms.
Many liberal democracies have social democratic political- economic systems, which emphasize welfare more than individual rights and curtail individual freedoms in favor of greater equality.
The basic liberal democratic tenets of participation, competition, and liberty are still respected by social democracies.
India, Japan, Taiwan, and South Korea are examples of countries that have developed liberal democratic institutions despite Mercantilist political economies emphasizing a strong role for the state.
The basic rights of participation, competition, and liberty are found in each case.
The degree of state autonomy and capacity is affected by this variation.
It's important to remember what isn't being said about democ.
There is no claim in the book that a particular kind of democracy is the best way to organize politics.
It is presenting democracy as a particular system of institutions that have evolved over time.
Each person has to decide if the goals of liberal democracy are the most important and if society is best served by being organized this way.
We now have an understanding of the basics of democracy, but we don't know why it came about or where it came from.
Many societies around the world have elements of democratic participation dating back thousands of years.
The roots of modern democracy can be found in ancient Greece and Rome.
The foundation for public participation is provided by Athenian and other early Greek democracies.
Ancient Greek democracy allowed the public to have a say in the affairs of government, choosing policies and making governing decisions.
Greece gives us the idea of popular sovereignty, but Rome gives us the idea of legislative bodies like a senate.
Neither Greek democracy nor Roman republicanism would be considered liberal democracies by today's standards.
Both restricted certain democratic elements.
Roman and Greek thought and practices have become intertwined to produce the modern liberal democratic regime we know today.
The discussion may lead us to conclude that the development of democ racy was a long line from Greece to today.
That wasn't the case.
Roman republicanism was different from Greek democracy.
In the 13th century England, democratic institutions and practices reappeared.
English nobles forced King John to sign the Magna Carta, a document that curbed the rights of the king and laid the foundation for an early form of legislature, a key element of republicanism.
The idea of liberty was set in motion by the assertion that all freemen should enjoy due process before the law.
We will not sell, deny or delay, right or justice.
The idea that no individual, not even the king, was above the law was presented by the Magna Carta.
This concept flourished in England over the centuries as democratic practices expanded and the public had more political rights.
The emergence of democracy in England was gradual.
The emergence of European states as a result of centuries of conflict was noted in Chapter 2.
The balance of power in England was due to the fact that neither the state nor the feudal elite were able to get the upper hand.
The need to maintain a large army to unify and defend the country was much lower for isolated England than for other European states.
Less need for a strong state to squeeze taxes from the public was provided by ocean trade.
The result was a separation of power that allowed individual freedom.
In ancient Athens, the public participates directly in governance and policy making.
The prevalent form of democracy in the modern age is indirectly participated in by the public.
The ideology emphasizing individual freedom and private property emerged in a country where the state capacity was not excessive.
Early on in England's political development, the public was able to gain the upper hand against the state.
Historical background can help us understand the emergence of democracy, but it doesn't give much guidance to scholars of contemporary politics.
There are competing explanations for democratization and democratic institutionalization.
Some of this may be a function of improved scholarship, but it may also be that explanations that were accurate at one time lose their explanatory power as the world changes.
One of the most popular theories is that democratization is linked to modernization.
The behavioral revolution in political science was connected to modernization theory, which states that as societies become more modern, they will inevitably become more democratic.
The rise of a middle class and a weakened of older traditional institutions are associated with modernization.
As societies become better educated and more economically sophisticated, they need more control over the state to achieve and defend their own interests, according to modernization theory.
The earliest known legal code was created by Babylonian ruler Hammurabi.
The first democracy was established in Athens.
The rule of law was established by English Magna Carta.
The Bill of Rights was passed in England.
New Zealand is the first country to give women the right to vote.
The collapse of the Soviet Union led to democratization in Eastern Europe.
The theory fell out of favor in the 70s.
In Latin America, democracy was failing, while in Asia, it was flourishing.
It seemed that modernization was irrelevant to the development of democracy and could lead to political violence and democratic failure.
Scholars no longer claim that modernization leads to democracy.
While democracy can emerge in a variety of circumstances, wealth and ongoing economic development are critical to the institutionalization and long term survival of any democracy.
The theory of democratization used to say that it was almost automatic once a country reached a certain standard of living.
The change would not be explained in this argument.
The oil states of the Middle East are examples of countries where standards of living have risen but democracy has not followed.
The political elites may have an answer.
For the past several decades, many scholars have turned away from modernization theory because they focused on the strategic motives of those in power.
The work used to describe political change rather than explain it, but has gained new life by drawing on earlier ideas of modernization theory.
The idea that a middle class is essential for democratization is central to modernization theory.
Poverty can be an obstacle to democracy, where people have little to fight for.
The distribution of wealth may be more important.
Political change is less likely if economic assets are concentrated in the hands of those in power.
The people who control these assets may not want to give them up.
Sources of wealth are not fixed, natural resources may decline, and the economy may stagnate.
Economic development Contemporary Democratization is important, but the nature of the resources that fuel it can determine the likelihood that democracy.
In the next chapter, we will talk about nondemocratic regimes.
The political power of society is emphasized in a different view of democratization.
The public's demand for power in the first place is not explained by the theories of elite-based theories.
Though modernization theory explains how societies might change in a direction more in tune with democratic institutions, it doesn't give a clear sense of why society would want to move in this direction.
Civil society can be defined as organized life outside the state or as the art of association.
Civil society is a fabric of organizations that are created by people to help define their own interests.
These associations serve as a vehicle for democratization by allowing people to articulate, promote, and defend what is important to them.
It is argued that democratization is more likely if civil society has been able to take root, because it provides the ideas and the tools of political action that allow small- scale democratic practices to spread.
Civil society in turn may push elites for change, depending on their incentives to do so.
The discussion of democratization has focused on variables inside the country.
The occupation of Japan and Germany after World War II is one example of an extreme case.
The international community plays a role in less overt ways according to scholars.
Foreign investment, globalization, and trade may push democratization forward.
Some believe that the institutionalization of democracy in southern and Eastern Europe came about because democracy was a precondition for membership in the European Union.
Civil society can be strengthened by the transmission of ideas across borders.
How influential the international community may be depends on a number of factors, including how open and dependent society is.
North Korea's isolation means that there is very little contact between the society and the outside world.
The international community has less tools to push for change in China because of the country's large economic resources.
The last argument is familiar to us.
In Chapter 3, we talked about the idea of political culture, which is an argument that the differences in societal institutions are shaping the landscape of political activity.
The relationship between freedom and equality may be influenced by political culture.
Some scholars argue that democracy is a culture emerging from historical, religious, and philosophical foundations.
Western democratic and individualist practice gave rise to modernity because of modernization.
If this is true, democratization is less likely to be found far from the West, where historical developments forged strong national identities as well as a commitment to democracy in its own right.
The arguments make many scholars uncomfortable, both because they are difficult to test and because they smack of determinism.
They have a questionable track record.
Spain, Portugal, Italy, and many Latin American nations, whose cultures were dominated by Roman Catholicism, were seen as unlikely to change until they did.
Similar arguments have been raised with regard to Asia.
We can argue that political culture can affect the character of a country.
Civil liberties have come into tension with values held by some among the majority Muslim population in Indonesia, despite the fact that democratization and a Contemporary Democratization 145 secular regime have been in place.
The implementation of laws against blaspheming and discrimination against minority Islamic sects is an example of this tension.
There are many ways to explain why democratization takes place.
Most of these factors play a role in each case of democratization, and scholars tend to favor one of these explanations over the others.
The stage for political activity and awareness can be set by modernization.
Economic conditions at home and international sanctions may affect elites.
Cultures may encourage certain kinds of identities and ideas that can get in the way of democracy.
Changing domestic and international conditions may mean that what leads to democracy now is unrelated to how it will come about in the future.
Politics is not a law that is unchanging.
The basic definition of liberal democracy and some of the explanations for how it emerged in the past and present are now understood.
We should look at how liberal democracies are constructed.
Liberal democratic institutions vary greatly.
Executives and the legislative relationship in each country is unique.
Each judiciary has a role to play in the democratic process.
The range and number of political parties are influenced by a variety of electoral systems around the world.
Basic civil rights and civil liberties are different from one liberal democracy to another.
There is no right or wrong way to build a liberal democracy.
Before we consider several of their most common combinations, let's take 888-353-1299 888-353-1299 888-353-1299 888-353-1299 888-353-1299 888-353-1299 888-353-1299 888-353-1299 888-353-1299 888-353-1299 888-353-1299 888-353-1299 888-353-1299 888-353-1299 888-353-1299 888-353-1299 888-353-1299 888-353-1299 888-353-1299 888-353-1299 888-353-1299 888-353-1299 888-353-1299 888-353-1299 888-353-1299 888-353-1299 888-353-1299 888-353-1299 888-353-1299 888-353-1299 888-353-1299 888-353-1299 888-353-1299 888-353-1299 888-353-1299 888-353-1299 888-353-1299 888-353-1299 888-353-1299 888-353-1299 888-353-1299 888-353-1299 888-353-1299 888-353-1299
The laws and policies of a state are carried out by the branch.
When we think of this office, what often comes to mind is a single person in charge of leading the country and setting a national agenda as well as leading foreign policy and serving as commander in chief in times of war.
The executive has two distinct roles.
The head of state's duties include foreign policy and war.
The distinction between direct policy management and international and symbolic functions goes back to the days when monarchs ruled over their subjects, leaving ministers in charge of running the country.
The roles are combined or separated into different degrees.
The prime minister is the main executive over the other ministers in the cabinet.
They may serve with a head of state, a monarch or a president.
In the United States, the president is both head of state and head of government.
The balance of power between the head of state and the government varies from country to country.
It is charged with passing legislation.
Legislators have different political powers and construction.
Bicameral and unicameral systems are different.
Most liberal democracies are bicameral, but small countries are more likely to have unicameral systems.
Bicameral systems were created in England and other European states to serve the interests of different economic classes.
Bicameralism remained even as feudalism gave way to democracy.
In some countries, an upper chamber was retained as a check on the lower house because of the fear that a elected lower house would make rash decisions.
Legislation from the lower house can be amended or vetoed by the upper houses.
Members of upper houses often serve for longer terms than members of lower houses.
Federalism is a related element to judicial review.
Federal states rely on an upper house to represent local interests, so that members are able to oversee legislation that is relevant to local policies.
The desire to check a directly elected lower house is reflected in the fact that local legislatures may even appoint orelect members of the upper chamber.
Local legislatures in the United States indirectly elected the Senate until 1913.
Bicameral legislatures are a feature of many unitary (nonfederal) liberal democratic systems.
Legislators may wield a lot of power over the executive, serving as the prime engine of policy or legislation, or taking a backseat to executive authority.
The balance of power between upper and lower houses is different from country to country and issue to issue.
The judiciary is central to liberal democracies.
The rules of the political game are laid out by the laws of all states.
The core of this body of laws is a constitution, which is the fundamental expression of the regime and the justification for subsequent legislation and the powers of executives, legislatures, and other political actors.
Constitutions may not count in nondemocratic systems because the state acts as it sees fit.
The sovereignty of law over the people and elected officials.
The DEMOCRATIC REGIMES judicial institutions are important components in maintaining law and adhering to the constitution.
judiciaries vary greatly across liberal democracies, not just in their authority but also in how laws are interpreted and reviewed.
There has been a rise in the number of rights that are protected under the constitution.
judiciaries are needed to rule on the constitutions as they define more rights.
In most countries, the right of judicial review is included in the constitution.
In some countries, such as the United States and Australia, this right is implicit and has become institutionalized in the absence of a specific provision in the constitution.
The authority and division of high courts are different.
The United States, Canada, Japan, and Australia have combined appellate and constitutional courts.
A single high court is a final court of appeals and a court of constitutional review.
Because of this dual function, trials are an important source of constitutional interpretation.
Brazil has a final court of appeals and a constitutional court.
The structure limits the influence of trials on constitutional interpretation.
Judicial systems have different powers and how they can use them.
We might think that appellate courts are more powerful than constitutional courts because of their nature.
Judicial authority can be shaped by other important variations.
Judicial review can be either concrete or abstract.
Such rulings are usually initiated by one or more elected officials.
The timing of their review can be different.
In some countries, the constitutional court may give a ruling before a piece of legislation is passed.
The lifetime tenure of the U.S. Supreme Court judges is an example of the difference in the appointment and tenure institutions of the Democratic State 149 of their judges.
The power of the courts in the democratic process can be affected by the combination of these factors.
The main differences in how some institutions can be constructed in relation to one another are discussed in our overview of state institutions.
In reality, there are many variations within these basic categories.
The parliament consists of two basic elements: first, the prime minister and his cabinet come out of the legislature, and second, the legislature removes the prime minister from office.
Political power is divided between a head of government and a head of state.
The head of state can be either directly elected by the public or indirectly elected by the legislature.
In the case of monarchs, the head of state's powers are usually ceremonial.
If legislation is seen as undemocratic, they may have the ability to reject it or forward it to a court.
The powers of the president or monarch are rarely exercised.
The power of the legislature is reflected in the prime minister's election.
He or she is the leader of the party in the lower house that has the most seats.
The prime minister and other members of her or his cabinet remain in the lower house of the legislature.
The legislature and the executive do not check and balance each other's power to the degree that they do in presidential systems, because of the tight connection between the two branches of government.
A party with a majority of seats in the legislature can choose its own prime minister and cabinet.
When a party holds more seats than any other party but less than 50 percent of them, it must usually form a coalition government with one or more other parties.
The prime minister will come from the largest party, while other members of the cabinet will come from the coalition parties.
It is possible for a coalition of smaller parties to form a government if the largest party does not have a majority.