POLS 101: Midterm Essay - Critical Analysis of Political Ideologies

This essay provides a critical analysis of five prominent political ideologies: liberal democracy, social democracy, communism, authoritarianism, and totalitarianism. The essay explores the core tenets of each ideology, including their views on government, individual rights, economic systems, and the role of the state. It examines the historical context and practical applications of each ideology, providing examples such as the United States and France for liberal democracy, Nordic countries for social democracy, the former Soviet Union and modern China for communism, and various Latin American, African, and Middle Eastern countries for authoritarianism and totalitarianism. The essay discusses the advantages and disadvantages of each ideology, comparing their effectiveness in different contexts, and concluding that while liberal democracy is suitable for stable times, authoritarianism may be better in transition periods.

POLITICAL SCIENCE
MID-TERM ESSAY
STUDENT ID:
[Pick the date]

Essay Choice 1
A key element of any political ideology is the underlying idea which acts as unifying force
which tends to act as the common link amongst the followers. Also, the interpretation of any
event depends on the underlying political ideology. This is apparent from the differing
interpretations of ideal polity along with the evolution of political systems in different
nations. In wake of importance of underlying political ideologies, the given essay aims to
critically analyse five different political ideologies.
One of these political ideologies is liberal democracy which tends to advocate a
representative government that operates under the liberalism principles i.e. the individual
rights are accorded protection under law by state. This is also called Western democracy and
has features such as multi-party democratic elections, rule of law along with separation of
power. This political ideology owes its origin to the Age of Enlightenment. This ideology laid
the foundation of modern democracy which was first visible in France and US. One of the
criticisms of this ideology is that it represents a form of plutocracy as the power through
elections is limited to only the rich with poor having limited representation. However, a key
advantage relates to the safeguards provided for individual freedom.
Another political ideology is social democracy which provides for a greater role of the state
which through interventions must ensure social justice in an otherwise liberal democratic set-
up. Further, the states tend to take measures so as to ensure that there is better economic
distribution through arrangements such as collective bargaining and high taxes. This political
ideology is indicated in the case of Nordic countries where state intervenes in a capitalist
system to ensure a more egalitarian society. The key criticism of this political ideology is that
the state intervenes only to strengthen the capitalist society and not to convert into a socialist
society. However, a key advantage of this system is that development and standards of living
are more uniform across more societies. Further, social security and intervention enables
protection in case of any global slowdown.
The third political ideology is communism where the eventual goal is to pave way for a
communist society establishment. Such a society would have common ownership of
production means and social classes and state would be largely absent. Further, religion also
does not any role in this system. The best example of communism at play was the erstwhile
Soviet Union. However, in the current context, the closest example is provided by China
which has a one party system and also there is no concept of free elections as in democracy.

A key criticism of communism is that this idea is not practical especially seen in the context
of Soviet Union and economic changes witnessed in countries such as China. However,
theoretically this political ideology seems quite appealing as it targets the various issues of
capitalist society.
The fourth political ideology is authoritarianism where the power is highly centralised with
minimal individual freedoms that are available. The constitutional accountability along with
rule of law tend to be absent in such a regime. Any resistance is suppressed with the use of
brutal force. Typically such a system draws legitimacy through situations when centralised
control is necessary. The examples of this system in the past include Latin American
countries. In the present, such system is prevalent in many African countries, Middle Eastern
countries along with North Korea. A key criticism of this system is that this system is not
sustainable in the long run as it is not pro-development owing to constant use of violence
which hinders development. However, for certain emergency situations where a strong action
is required, this political ideology is preferred to others.
The fifth political ideology is totalitarianism which is an extreme form of authoritarianism
with extreme central control over the public and private life of individuals. There is only one
supreme leader who embodies absolute power with no accountability. There is mass
surveillance, political repression and total economic control. This system owes its origin to
the fascist states before the second word war. This system was then continued in Soviet
Union under the reign of Joseph Stalin. In the present day, North Korea would be an
appropriate example. The benefits and criticism with this system are similar to that
highlighted for authoritarianism. As a result, it is suitable for navigating troubled periods
such as transition or revolution.
The above discussion clearly highlights that the various political ideologies indicate critical
differences with regards to economic system, role of state, individual freedom, elections and
civil liberties. Clearly, each system have their pros and cons but considering empirical
evidence, it seems that the liberal democracy is the most apt political ideology especially in
times of stability. However, this model fails in transition periods when authoritarianism might
be considered as a better choice.