Comparative Politics Described By Dickovick And Eastwood

Change Title
Your Name
Teacher's name
course title and block
date
Comparative politics, as described by Dickovick and Eastwood, characterizes an exhaustive empirical approach to study the relative conditions in examining about "why the world operates in the way it does." Added by Dickovick and Eastwood, the comparative method, in which arguments are formed, are about the systematic ways on comparing and differentiating the variables, from which different cases are formed to be the basic unit of comparison. The authors addressed the use of two simple comparative method design system to provide an arguable explanation for certain similarities and differences. The two comparative designs are: the Most-similar-system (MSS) and the most-different-system (MDS) designs. These methods attempt to create theories and narrow down the comparative research process. The MSS uses logic to mirror the similarities of different cases in order to find the differences that resulted; while, the MDS uses logic to mirror the differences of the cases in order to find the similarities that resulted from the outcome. The methods follow the principles of cause and effect to see if the outcome varies in one case or another. Also, the Within-case comparison is added to further elaborate a certain case to find any variation and figure out what happened over time. In the given problem, the comparative methods are integrated to explain the success of democracy in the United States. In order to create a solid grasp of solving the problem, the measurement on the current state of democracy in different countries is needed, through operationalzing the concept of democracy, it will be easier to establish a measurable approach and describe how democracy is successful by comparison with other countries. One available measurement of the state of democracy is using the democracy index. The democracy index, generated by the Economic Intelligence Unit (EIU), approached the measurement of democracy using five rudimentary bases, including: electoral process and pluralism, civil liberties, functioning of the government, political participation, and political culture. These five predictors will serve as the variables to find the relationships between a successful democracy and a flawed democracy. The democracy index is made by using a public-opinion survey and ranks each country depending on the weighed average of the scores as one of four regime types: full democracy, flawed democracy, hybrid regimes and authoritarian regimes. Although a more exhaustive empirical study is needed to explain the success of democracy in the United States, these rudimentary, yet essential basic categories of democracy that is incorporated with the use of MSS method of comparison, should serve as the basis of valuable information to explain the measures of successful democracy in the United States.[J. Tyler Dickovick and Jonathan Eastwood. Comparative Politics: Integrating Theories, Methods, and Cases (3rd ed.). (England: Oxford University Press, 2018), 4.] [Ran Hirschl. "The Nordic counternarrative: Democracy, human development, and judicial review." International Journal of Constitutional Law 9, no. 2 (April 2011): 453, https://doi.org/10.1093/icon/mor034.] [Laza Kekic, "The Economist Intelligence Unit's index of democracy," The Economist, last modified, November 15, 2006, /media/pdf/DEMOCRACY_INDEX_2007_v3.pdf.]
A prominent question would be which among the countries was ranked number 1 in the latest democracy index? Next, what is the rank of the United States? These questions will narrow down the comparison of a democracy between the most successful one and the United States. Then, how are the bases of comparison differ between the number 1 democratic country and the United State? In the 2018 release of the Democracy index, Norway is ranked number 1 while the United States ranked is at the 25th place. The regime types are the weighed average scores from a 0 to 10 scale. The higher the score in the democracy index, the nearer the country is to be classified as a full democracy. Norway scored 9.87 and is classified as a full democracy while the United States scored 7.96 and is classified as flawed democracy. The countries with full democracy need to have a score of 8 to 10 while the flawed democracies score is from 6 to 7.9. Norway got an almost perfect score while the United States need to gain a lot of ground to be considered as full democracy.[Laza Kekic, "The Economist Intelligence Unit's index of democracy."] [Hirschl, "The Nordic counternarrative: Democracy, human development, and judicial review," 453.] [Ian Burrows,"Chart of the day: Europe dominates top of democracy index, North Korea lags in last," ABC News, Last modified, January 10, 2019, /news/2019-01-10/democracy-index-economist-intelligence-unit-2018/10703184.] [Hirschl, "The Nordic counternarrative: Democracy, human development, and judicial review," 453.]
The next questions would be about the scores in the individual bases. What is the difference between Norway and the Unites States in terms of the bases of democracy index? The question will show the specific areas on where Norway is more successful than the United States. These facts will lead to different evidences on why Norway got higher scores that the United States. Norway got a perfect score in the, Electoral process; political participation; and, political culture. The United States, on the other hand, got low scores in the, political participation; functioning of government; and, political culture. The United States highest score is on the electoral process and pluralism. Upon further observation of the bases of comparison, only the electoral process and the political participation can be used to empirically measure the state of democracy in Norway and the United states because the national data of the total voter population can be used unlike the political culture, functioning of the government and civil liberties where the EIU can only u...