Final Exam
Student Name
Institution
Final Exam
Question One
The proposed shift in electoral systems in Quebec is positive. The current electoral system in Quebec, a province in Canada, is the First-Past-The-Poll system (FPTP). This electoral system falls under plurality electoral systems. It operates based on a simple majority of votes where the electorate cast votes for an individual, and the candidate with the most votes is elected (Abramson et al., 2010). The electorate reform was first alluded to in May 2018 by the current Premier Francois Legault. The bill for electoral reform has since been tabled in Parliament for scrutiny. The final decision on the electoral reform will be through a referendum held in conjunction with the provincial elections in 2022. The referendum is against the backdrop of previous failed attempts at electoral reform in British Columbia, Ontario, and Prince Edward Island (Richer, 2019).
The FPTP is preserved because of the simplicity it offers in voting. The candidate with the majority votes wins the election, and usually, the affiliated party wins majority seats. The system also creates a clear opposition government that is the runner-up (Abramson et al., 2010). The primary arguments tabled against the current FPTP include vote wasting and disproportionate vote to seat shares. Vote wasting refers to tactical voting instead of sincere voting, where the electorate casts votes that do not reflect their first choice. The rationale is to avoid casting a vote that is not pivotal to the result (Abramson et al., 2010). Additionally, the FPTP creates a system where the minority groups are unlikely to gain representation in the legislature since major parties are the top vote receivers in this system (Abramson et al., 2010).
The proposed shift in the electoral system towards a Mixed Member Proportional Representation system (MMP) will resolve the shortcomings of the FPTP. The MMP system is a form of mixed systems that operates based on two votes per voter, one for a political party and one for selecting a representative to a single-seat constituency (Linhart et al., 2019). Furthermore, the seat share in MMP is decided by the percentage of votes cast where a party will receive representation that coincides with their votes (Linhart et al., 2019). This system resolves the issue of under-representation based on a disproportionate vote to seat shares. It also provides voters with more latitude in casting votes. The main concern against the system is complexity, which may result in reduced voter participation. However, this concern can be resolved through public awareness campaigns to increase the new system’s voter knowledge. Additionally, the concern on vote wasting is resolved because even minority parties have a chance at representation, allowing voters to engage in sincere voting.
Question Two
Sudan went through a revolution in the period of 2018-2019. A revolution is defined as mass mobilization geared towards regime change. The main features include mass mobilization, regime change, and rapid socio-economic and cultural change during or after the regime change (Coccia, 2018). The events of 2018-2019 in Sudan constituted government malpractices that resulted in austerity measures to prevent economic collapse. The key measures that elicited public revolt were cuts on bread and fuel subsidies (BBC, 2019). The public took to the streets and engaged in mass protests for several months targeted at removing the then-president Omar Al Bashir, who had remained in office for 30 years. The military overthrew the president on 11th April 2019 when an army council took over the government to provide for a peaceful transition to a democratic government (BBC, 2019).
The events align with the characteristics of a revolution. The mass demonstrations in South Sudan’s streets satisfied the criterion of mass mobilization, which was achieved through online communication. The mass demonstrations acted as protests and melting pots for cultural exchange where the South Sudanese people enjoyed their new freedoms (BBC, 2019). Additionally, the events entailed a regime change from the Al Bashir government to a transition government presided over by the Transitional Military Council (TMC), an army council consisting of seven members (BBC, 2019). Finally, the events entailed a rapid shift in the socio-economic and cultural atmosphere of South Sudan. This shift was predominantly seen in the cultural sphere where women who had been oppressed by extremist Islamists rules expressed their new freedoms through dress and even direct participation in the demonstrations (BBC, 2019). Conclusively, the events of 2018 to 2019 in Sudan amounted to a revolution.
Question Four
The regime in Thailand is an Electoral Authoritarian system. Thailand was previously an absolute monarch with the king as the head. The regime was converted into a constitutional monarchy in 1932 after the Siamese Revolution. This system means that the monarchy can only exercise authority in line with constitutional provisions (Head, 2017). The constitution in Thailand has been subject to numerous amendments and rewrites and is currently in its 20th form. The current document is the Thailand Constitution 2017, which was passed through questionable efforts by the government. These efforts included limiting public engagement and providing military rule as the alternative to the new constitution (Head, 2017).
The Constitution provides for a constitutional monarchy. Section 3 of the Thailand Constitution declares the king as the head of state but tempers his authority by declaring that he must act per the constitution. The monarchy is safeguarded through section 255, which prohibits a government shift that would remove the king as the head of state. Theoretically, Thailand is a constitutional monarchy with a king as a head of state whose powers are circumscribed by the constitution. The reality of governance in Thailand differs from these constitutional provisions. The current king, King Maha Vajiralongkorn, has engaged in activities that are reminiscent of the absolute monarchy era. These measures range from arbitrary removal of statutes to unconstitutional restrictions of democratic rights (The Economist, 2020).
The actions of the King reflect an electoral authoritarian government. An electoral authoritarian regime is defined as a system of governance where the regime presents a false image of multi-party democracy within the local and national government levels while the election process is under the control of the ruling government. This system features regular elections since the results are already known (Case, 2011). The system is prevalent in Thailand, where the constitutional monarchy presents a false representation of multi-party democracy through regular elections that provide for upward control where sovereignty resides in the voters. However, the monarchy employs strict control measures to ensure no real threat to their rule. Such a measure was the disbanding of the Future Forward Party that was launched in 2018. This political party was the first real opposition to the constitutional monarchy since its formulation and was disbanded through malicious court cases (The Economist, 2020). Another instance is the squashing of protests by the monarch through executive decrees that prohibited gatherings of more than four people (Paddock & Suhartono, 2020). Consequently, the governance system in Thailand is democratic on face value; however, a deeper look reveals the authoritarian threads. Thailand provides an example of a regime that is electoral authoritarian.
References
Abramson, P. R., Aldrich, J. H., Blais, A., Diamond, M., Diskin, A., Indridason, I. H., … & Levine, R. (2010). Comparing strategic voting under FPTP and PR. Comparative Political Studies, 43(1), 61-90.
BBC. Sudan crisis: What you need to know. (2019, August 16). Retrieved November 17, 2020, from https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-48511226
Case, W. (2011). Electoral authoritarianism and backlash: Hardening Malaysia, oscillating Thailand. International Political Science Review, 32(4), 438-457.
Coccia, M. (2018). What are the characteristics of revolution and evolution?. Journal of Economic and Social Thought, 5(4), 288-294.
Head, J. (2017, April 07). Thailand’s constitution: New era, new uncertainties. Retrieved November 17, 2020, from https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-39499485
Linhart, E., Raabe, J., & Statsch, P. (2019). Mixed-member proportional electoral systems–the best of both worlds?. Journal of Elections, Public Opinion, and Parties, 29(1), 21-40.
Paddock, R., & Suhartono, M. (2020, October). Thailand’s Leader Offers End to Crackdown on Pro-Democracy Protesters. NY Times. Retrieved November 17, 2020, from https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/21/world/asia/thailand-protest-prayuth-emergency.html
Richer, J. (2019, September 26). Quebecers to decide in 2022 whether they want to change electoral system. Retrieved November 17, 2020, from https://www.nationalobserver.com/2019/09/26/news/quebecers-decide-2022-whether-they-want-change-electoral-system
The Economist. Thailand’s king seeks to bring back absolute monarchy. (2020, October 17). Retrieved November 17, 2020, from https://www.economist.com/briefing/2020/10/14/thailands-king-seeks-to-bring-back-absolute-monarchy