It has been man's most ancient and ultimate quest to apprehend different phenomena through different processes and then define them through different terms. One of that processes is the classification and then define or label at the basis of results obtained through different comparisons.
But...I question the validity of this process when it comes to the stereotypical explanation of a government system in context of a certain term.
I think whatever number of terms you may develop but you cannot entirely cover all the aspects of a system running in that state. As all states have different political systems and dynamics,therefore, cannot be stereotyped under one term or definition because you need to take in account all the different aspects who drive and create a certain political system.
The development of a certain Political System is not an over-night process. There are many factors which ultimately develop a system through their proportional contributions.
Every state has different cultural and religious dynamics, different historical affiliations, different ideologies,different perceptions and notions, different ethnic identities, different territorial restrictions and affinities, different economic, geographical and many other constraints which are embedded deeply in its structural systems. All the decisions what people make are all dependent on all these and many other factors. These factors make inevitable effect on the system which runs a state.
And, these factors can never have same value and impact for any two different states. So, for every state when we want to define its political system, its sinful to ignore its structural diversity.
And...hence...diversity kills comparison, but only similarity leads to it.
So, it is good to analyze different states on the kind of political systems but comparing them is never justified just on the basis of if terms labeled to them are same. But in fact they will never become same even if they have same terms to identify them.
No comments:
Post a Comment