Month 3 Flashcards
Democratic states are generally as ____ as nondemocracies
war-prone
Normative Assumptions
-states externalization norms that are developed within domestic processes
-anarchic nature if politics implies nondemocratic domination
democratic norms
live and let live
no democratic norms
competition is violent and coercive
structural assumptions
-international challenges require leaders to mobilize support from legitimate groups
-shortcuts can only be done in emergencies
rich states don’t fight because
the losses outweigh the gains
rapidly growing states ______ through war
harm their own growth
most post wwii democracies have
allied in some way with one another before
considerable factors of war-proneness
degree of institutional constraints
wealth and economic growth
alliances
contiguity
military capability
preventative war
fear of power decline relative to adversary fuels conflict
what causes war and change
uneven rates of growth
liberal complaisance leaves states
militarily unprepared for wars
democratic leader/challenger
-rules reflect liberal institutions, not anarchy
-states are outnumbered so band together
-positive sum relationships
democratic leader/nondemocratic challenger
-will not wage war but forms defensive alliance systems
-attempts at external balancing often fail
-coalitions are deterrents rather than stimuli for preventative war
accommodation
leader and challenger are democracies
internal balancing
problematic for democracies unless they possess an inexpensive option
alliance formation
declining democracies confronting rising nondemocracies
preventative war
declining nondemocratic states
risk of military conflict depends on
speed of transition to democracy and social composition
democratizing states tend to pursue
nationalist, expansionist and belligerent foreign policy
anocratic
semi-democracy
democracy is more likely in
developed countries
military regimes are more susceptible to
internal disintegration
cadre
group trained to carry out goals of party-state and encore pedagogy
personalist clique
closest people to the political leader
personalist regimes arise when
military and the party are not developed or autonomous
what affects the longevity of regimes
the death of a leader
the narrowness of support bases
few endogenous instability sources
direct democracy
all eligible citizens actively participate
representative democracy
eligible citizens remain the sovereign power
parliamentary democracy
the representative is appointed and dismissed by other elected representatives
presidential democracy
president is head of government and controls most executive powers
democratic backsliding
gradual return of a state to autocracy
authoritarian resurgence
state has history of authoritarianism and that leads to a resurgence
single party
one political party controls the government
military regime
high ranking military officials determine policies
personalist regime
leader surrounds himself with closest individuals
international cooperation
states alter policies to best coincide with one another’s preferences
single party regimes tend to develop
all-encompassing ideology rather than legitimize rule (depends on public acceptance)
political incentive theory
political leaders care most about staying in office
—strive to satisfy domestic society
passive influences on authoritarianism
—diffusion and learning processes tied to distant events
—influence of international system of sovereign states
—shifting nature of international economy
—role of international linkages
passive
no intent to shape politics
active
intent to shape politics
unintended
intent and autocracy bolstering not primary intention
autocratic sponsorship
intent, bolstering primary intention
democratic resistance
intent, bolstering, principal motivations not ideological
autocracy promotion
intent, bolstering, principal motivations ideological
petrostates are often driven by
high oil revenue
effects of high oil revenue driven autonomy
lowered domestic accountability
larger funding for militaristic expansion
SIT
people form aspects of their self-image based on social group
why did gorbachev adopt new thinking
moscow’s declining economy and power
reagan administrations arms spending and covent operations
ability to reverse erosion of power
Russia’s assertiveness is linked to
economic recovery
russia is divided upon its
european-ness
china and russia post ussr both needed to
recover, appeal to other new potential allies, integrate into national order without putting in all the work
