Text 1. Traditional systems of classification

A. Before examining how different systems have been classified, it is necessary to reflect on both — what is being classified, and why such classifications have been undertaken. First, what is ‘government’, and how do governments differ from ‘political systems’ or ‘regimes’? ‘Government’ refers to the institutional processes through which collective and usually binding decisions are made. A political system or regime, on the other hand, is a broader term that encompasses not only the mechanisms of government and the institutions of the state, but also the structures and processes through which these interact with the larger society.

A political system is, in effect, a subsystem of the larger social system. It is a ‘system’ in that there are interrelationships within a complex whole, and ‘political’ in that these interrelationships relate to the distribution of power, wealth and resources in society.

A regime is therefore a ‘system of rule’ that endures despite the fact that governments come and go. Whereas governments can be changed by elections, through dynastic succession, as a result of coup d’états and so on, regimes can only be changed by military intervention from without or by some kind of revolutionary upheaval from within.

B. Why classify political systems?

The interest in classifying political systems stems from two sources. First, classification is an essential aid to the understanding of politics and government. The second purpose of classification is to facilitate evaluation rather than analysis. In other words, understanding is closely tied up with normative judgements: questions about ‘what is’ are linked to questions about “what should be’.

All systems of classification have their drawbacks, however. As with all analytical devices, there is a danger of simplification. The classification of regimes under the same heading draws attention to the similarities that they share, but there is a risk that the differences that divide them will be ignored or disguised. A related problem is a possible failure to see that a phenomenon may have different meanings in different contexts. For instance, in Japan and throughout East Asia, ‘the state’ may be different in kind and significance from ‘the state’ as generally understood in the context of the West classification process. Finally, all systems of classifications have the drawback that they are necessarily state-bound: they treat individual countries as coherent or independent entities in their own right. Although this approach is by no means invalid, it is now widely viewed as incomplete in the light of the phenomenon of globalization.

C. Since the late 1980s, the regime-classification industry has been in a limbo. Older categories, particularly the ‘three worlds’ division, were certainly redundant, but the political contours of the new world were far from clear. The image of a ‘world of liberal democracies’ suggested the superiority of a specifically western model of development, based perhaps especially on the USA, and it implied that values such as individualism, rights and choice are universally applicable. One result of this was a failure to recognize the significance, for instance, of Islamic and Confucian political forms.

However, one of the difficulties of establishing a new system of classification is that there is no consensus about the criteria upon which such a system should be based. No system of classification relies on a single all-important factor. Nevertheless, particular systems have tended to prioritize different sets of criteria. Among the parameters most commonly used are the following:

• Who rules? Is political participation confined to an elite body or privileged group, or does it encompass the entire population?

• How is compliance achieved? Is government obeyed as a result of the exercise or threat of force or through bargaining and compromise?

• Is government power centralized or fragmented? What kinds of check and balance operate in the political system?

• How is government power acquired and transferred? Is a regime open and competitive, or is it monolithic?

• What is the balance between the state and the individual? What is the distribution of rights and responsibilities between government and citizens?

• What is the level of material development?: How materially affluent is the society, and how equally is wealth distributed?

• How is economic life organized? Is the economy geared to the market or to planning, and what economic role does government play?

• How stable is a regime? Has the regime survived over time, and does it have the capacity to respond to new demands and challenges? Nevertheless, five regime types can be identified in the modern world:

• Western polyarchies

• Postcommunist regimes

• East Asian regimes

• Islamic regimes

• Military regimes.

AFTER-READING activity

Read the text in more depth to do the ‘After-reading exercises’.

Ex. 1. Comprehension check

A.

1. What is the difference between ‘government’ and a ‘political system ’?

2. What is ‘political’ in a political system?

3. Through which means can a regime be changed?

B.

1. Name two reasons for classifying political systems.

2. All systems of classification have their drawbacks. Name three of them given in the text.

3. Give an example of different interpretations of the same thing in different contexts in the text.

C.

1. The regime classification industry has been in a limbo lately. Find facts accounting for it,

2. Give your set of priorities of the parameters listed in the text for classification of a system.

Ex. 2. Terminology

Match the notions with the definitions:

Notion

1. Government

2. A political system or regime

3. Absolutism

4. Totalitarianism

5. Liberal democracy

Definition

1. An all-encompassing system of political rule that is typically established by ideological manipulation and open terror and brutality.

2. A form of democratic rule that balances the principle of limited government against the ideal of popular consent.

3. Institutional processes through which collective and usually j, binding decisions are made.

4. A network of relationships through which government generates policies in response to demands or support from general public.

5. Theory or practice of absolute government that cannot be constrained by a body externa to itself.

Work with the dictionary and consult the text to do ex. 3, 4

Ex. 3. Translate from English into Russian:

Binding decisions; to interact with society; the distribution of power; analytical devices; to draw attention to something; to disguise differences; throughout East Asia; all the systems of classifications are state-bound; coherent or independent entities; in the light of the phenomenon of globalization; the regime — classification industry has been in a limbo; to prioritize different sets of criteria; through bargaining and compromise; centralized or fragmented power; materially affluent society; the economy is geared to the market; to identify regimes.

Ex. 4. Translate from Russian into English

Взаимодействовать с кем-нибудь; находиться в действии; тогда как; государственный переворот; происходить от чего- либо; существенная помощь; оценка чего-либо; недостатки; под заголовком; превосходство сугубо западной модели развития; быть повсеместно приемлемым/пригодным; установить новую систему; достичь соответствия; приобрести и передать полномочия; распределение прав и обязанностей; стабильный режим; соответствовать новым требованиям.

Ex. 5. Fill in the blanks in column ‘A’ with the topical vocabulary units from column ‘B’, making all necessary changes.

‘A’ ‘B’

1. He ... the damage at $50. a. redundant

2. The Committee ... it better b. invalid to postpone the meeting.

3. The ...was not in his favour c. to undertake

and he was sentenced to

death. d. to refer

4.The government ... in the dispute

and it was settled

in a peaceful way. e. coup d’etat

5. Who ... him as President?

6. The peers’ rights of ... in the British

Parliament were disputed. f. to separate

The Prime Minister showed

remarkable powers of ...

... by the text we can g. to judge, to classify

distinguish or ... different regimes.

7. A friend is a person who ... your troubles

as well as your joys with you. h. endurance

8. The allies might be ... by the Ocean

but not by the shared values or interests.

9. As many workers were made ... they i. to share

went on strike.

10. All documents having no legal force are ...

11. The authorities must ... some effective j. succession

measures to overcome the crisis.

13. ‘Government’ ... to the

institutional processes through which k. to evaluate

collective and usually binding

decisions are made. l. to ludge

14.The military junta came to

power as a m. judgement

result of a ...

n. to intervene

o. to succeed

Ex. 6. Find synonyms in the text for the following verbs and nouns:

To contemplate, to enforce, to comprise, to act with/among, to stand, to result from, to make easier, to be connected, to separate, to cover, to handle sb, to be regarded, to be obsolete, to set sth to limit, to orient/direct; troubles/revolt, rebellion, shortcomings, means, title, importance, stance, unanimity, yardstick, conformity.

Ex. 7. Make the adjectives negative:

Institutional, binding, military, essential, analytical, related, significant, coherent, complete, common, centralized, stable, distinguishable, democratic.

Ex. 8. Paraphrase the following sentences, using the Gerund

Model 1. It’s useless to classify these things. ft is no use classifying them.

There is no point in classifying them.

1. It’s useless to remind him of his words, he never keeps his promises.

2. It was useless to judge the accused in his absence.

3. It was useless to offer money to share in the expenses, he would not let it.

4. It’s useless to refer to his remark, it’s invalid.

Model 2.

Why confine our position only to these principles?

What’s the use of confining our position only to these principles ?

1. Why employ them for the job? They are hardly fit for it.

2. Why mention these papers? They are invalid.

3. Why judge them only by their last words?

4. Why endure the pain? You can consult the doctor.

5. Why insist on your point of view? It’s useless.

Ex. 9. Translate the sentences using ‘can’t (couldn’t) help doing sth’ or ‘can’t/ couldn’t but do sth’

1. В ходе процесса формирования коалиции нельзя не учиты­вать различные взгляды и противоборствующие интересы.

2. Оратор выступал так уверено, что мы не могли не поверить ему.

3. Трудно было не согласиться с судьёй.

4. Мы узнали, что их уволили, и нам невольно стало их жаль.

5. Мы не могли не разделить их оптимизма.

6. Они не могли не заметить, что докладчик сослался на этот исторический факт.

Ex. 10. Open the brackets, using the Gerund

1. We came to the conclusion that it was not worth (share) their optimism. They only pretended to sound cheerful,

2. Tie workers didn’t manage to talk the management into (make) concessions.

3. The government should give up (conduct) a divide-and-rule policy.

4. We must keep NATO from (intervene) in other countries’ domestic affairs.

5. The party risks (lose) its reputation if it undertakes such ikingerous steps.

6. Me suggested (not judge) people by appearances. They may be deceptive.

7. She got much pleasure out of (listen) to the orator.

8. He Mocceeded in (make) a favorable impression on the audience.

9. We look forward to your (take part) in our conference. We don’t mind your colleague (join) either.

10. There’s no reason to insist on (judge) people by their first wrong step.

11. The orator succeeded in (classify) these nations, making a point of (reflect) all essentials.

12. Joe stopped (refer) to those remarks and dropped the subject.

Ex. 11. Translate into English

1. На протяжении веков классификация различных форм правления представляла собой одну из главных трудностей политического анализа.

Аристотель был первым, кто сделал попытку охарактеризовать существовавшие тогда политические режимы, используя такие термины, как «демократия», «олигархия» и «ти­рания», которые используются и по сей день.

Начиная с 18-го века и до недавнего времени системы правления чаще всего классифицировались либо как мо­нархии или республики, либо как автократические или конституционные режимы.

2. «Грех-полюсная» классификация политических систем, коррупция была особенно популярной в период Холодной вой­ны, создавала образ мировой политики, главной доминионами которой была борьба между демократией и тоталита­ризмом.

В свете последних событий, таких как крах коммунизма,

Восточной Азии, возникновение политического Ислама, существовавшая ранее классификация устарела.

Попытка классифицировать системы правления — не что иное как средство сделать процесс сравнения более методичным и системным.

Тоталитарный режим можно определить по «синдрому шести пунктов»:

• официальная идеология,

• однопартийное государство, обычно возглавляемое всемо­гущим лидером,

• система террористического полицейского контроля,

• монополия средств массовой информации,

• монополия средств вооруженной борьбы,

• государственный контроль над всеми аспектами экономи­ческой жизни.

Ex. 12. Fill in the blanks, using the Passive Voice and the topical vocabulary of the Unit LIBERAL DEMOCRACY

Liberal democracy is a form of (демократического правления) that balances the principle of (ограниченного правления) against the ideal of (народного согласия). Its ‘liberal’ features (отражаются) in a network of internal and external checks on government that (разработаны) to guarantee liberty and afford citizens (защиту) against the state. Its ‘democratic’ character (основывается) on a system of (регулярных и состязательных) elections, conducted on the basis of universal suffrage and (политическом равенстве). Although it (может использоваться) to describe a political principle, the term ‘liberal democracy’ (значительно чаще используется) to describe a particular type of regime. The defining (черты) of this type of regime are as follows:

• (конституционное правление) based on formal, usually legal, rules;

• (гарантии гражданских свобод) and individual rights;

• institutionalised fragmentation and (система сдержек и противовесов);

• (регулярные выборы) that respect the principle of ‘one person, one vote’; one vote, one value;

• party competition and (политический плюрализм);

• (независимость) of organised groups and interests from (системы правления);

• (экономика частного предпринимательства организована) along market lines.

Ex. 13. Fill in the blanks with prepositions

This type ... classification allows judgements to be made ... relation ... political structures.

Should India abandon federalism ... favour ... either a unitary system or regional independence?

Should the UK adopt a «written» constitution and a bill ... tights?

Aristotle’s approach ... the problem is worth taking ... account.

He concluded that absolutism was the most defensive ... regimes.

Absolutism established a sovereign who makes law, but is not bound ... those laws.

The overriding merit ... vesting sovereignty ... a single individual was that it would then be indivisible: sovereignty would be expressed ... a single voice that could claim final authority.

These ideas were later revised,,, early liberals, who championed the cause ... constitutional government.

They advocated a system ... limited government to provide protection ... natural rights, mainly the rights ... life, liberty and property.

Appearance ... the inter-war period ... new forms ... authoritarianism, particularly ... Stalinist Russia, Fascist Italy and Nazi Germany, encouraged the view that the world was divided ... two kinds ... regime: democratic states and totalitarian states.

Ex. 14. Translate the text into English