We are all aware of the fact that there is so much political difference between the countries of the world that sometimes they all seem too far apart to make any communication. International institutions exist precisely to help us with such problems and to resolve the tensions between the opposing worldviews. But there are also many similar aspects to political governance that make countries collaborate and work together towards a single goal. That will be the topic of this article. We will look at two political and economic systems that have shaped the modern discussion about the state and the role it should have in the future for governing people.
What are exactly the differences between the two models? And how is this manifested in the countries that have implemented the different ideologies?
This form of governance goes back all the way to the enlightenment and the revolutions that came in the midst of those new ideas being born. Socialism, even though it is often associated with communism has actually developed separately as a political perspective. Even Karl Marx wrote about socialism as a stepping stone towards what he envisioned as the global worker’s revolution.
The form of governance is based on the principle that the state should be as a parent to their citizens. What does that mean? The state should not control the market or any other aspect of public life but it should have a say in it. That also means that the main focus of the socialist politician is to ensure funds for socially important aspects of the state.
That is, the state should make free health care and education possible for all its citizens and it should also make sure that there are no socially endangered individuals. Generally, the state cares for its citizens even though it can sometimes cost the country too much money. Governing bodies should balance those things out over time.
As a complete opposite to communism and to some extent to socialism is what we often term as neo-liberal capitalism. The biggest difference is in the level of influence the state displays over any of its bodies. The state is redundant in social affairs and this is left to the NGO sector.
The state in the idealized version of this governing system should not interfere in the market and therefore should not interfere in social issues unless it is mandatory for ensuring the stability. This system presupposes that bureaucracy is the only thing we need for a successful country.
The market is free as is society, and by this, I mean that elements from society cam mix with each other freely and without any influence from “above”. That way new and exiting forms can come to life, and trade will not stop because it is based on natural reactions between the market and consumers.
Most modern countries try and find a way to balance out the two mentioned ideas of governance and to make the best possible amalgam of them so it is functional for their own country.
Countries all over the world are becoming part of this project and it is safe to say that it is worth the attention that it is getting. What is public accountability and what does it represent? How does it help with international trade and politics? Modern countries in the global system of production and with the free market no longer have a need to hide relevant state related information from the public and from other countries. On the contrary, transparency is considered an important part of today’s international politics. Why is this so?
The answer is simple enough, modern politics is greatly in control of the private sector and private investors have a need to know what is the state of affairs in the country they are willing to take their money to. Before they do so they will need to have some objective parameters to look at and by doing so to determine if the political and economic stability of the country in question is sufficient. The following five parameters all make up this system and once they are analyzed together they give us a complete picture of the socio-economic conditions in one country.
This aspect is concerned with the number of funds that are prescribed for political activities and for the financing of political parties in countries. Having the right balance is key for a good functioning democracy. There should not be too much fonds set aside for political activities as this will be an expense for the country, but enough needs to be given so all the public voices will be heard. Financial Disclosure (combination of income, assets, and conflicts of interest).
This is also important because it gives us an idea of how do the public officials use their position of power and whether or not they display symptoms of corruption and illegal activities. The extent of their wealth and property should be public knowledge.
There are situations when a person can pursue certain situations that can benefit them, but they do not. Sometimes this can be symptomatic of states that have bad governance or high level of corruption and low levels of social liberty. Keeping this aspect in check will help potential investors understand what they are dealing with when they want to invest in some foreign country.
This aspect is here to help us determine how liberal in the political and social domain is the state in question. What institutions of public informing exist in the county and how well developed is the media system are just some of the conditions that are considered when this factor is determined.
This last aspect is one of the most important if we want to consider public happiness and the general state of affairs in the state. Every country naturally has a need for import and if the government does not meet al the needs of their people they could have a crisis in their realm.