One Party Domination in Singapore and Mexico
Political scientists often describe Mexico as a one-party authoritarian state. Power is centralized in the hands of a virtually omnipotent president, who is always the candidate of the dominant or ruling party, which in Mexico is the Institutional Revolutionary Party (Partido Revolucionario Institucional, or PRI). Singapore is a one-party state that declares that it is democratic although when analyzed by political scientists is considered socialist. These parties have many similarities and many differences and this paper will undertake the task of comparing and contrasting the one-party system in both Singapore and Mexico. This analysis attempts to answer whether a one-party system can be democratic. The controlling political party in Mexico is the Partido Revolucionario Institucional (PRI), and it had been the governing political party since 1929. The PRI is divided up into three sectors: labor, agrarian, and popular. This party claims to be the true heir of Mexico's revolutionary tradition, and has worked extremely hard to keep an appearance as a left-wing party. Although the PRI certainly has right-wing and left-wing factions, it is probably more accurate to describe it as a "centrist conservative party dedicated to
(Johnson 1984b, p136) Throughout the development of the contemporary Mexican political system, the creation of pressure groups of one sort or another has been crucial to the exercise of power. For over a decade after its inauguration, the Barisan Socialis has been recognized as the most important party after the PAP. The reason that PAN accepted its non-dominant status is that the PRI consulted with business leaders associated with the PAN when deciding on policy or on people to fill certain positions. 1987a, p 148) The political party evolved as electoral devices to place party leaders in policy-influencing positions and to prepare the party tactically for a power role at a subsequent date. It is obvious that a major similarity is their emergence, the PAP and the PRI both started as revolutionary parties, the PAP wanted to break away from the United Kingdom, and the PRI formed to represent the revolutionary sector of its population. One of the PAP's first goals was to end colonial rule, and to stay with Malaysia. The example given in the paragraph above of Singapore's electoral mind-set, it shows how groups feel that their interests would be considered if they voted for the PAP. " (Johnson 1984a, p137) Until very recently for many Mexicans the PRI, the state, and the government were basically the same thing. (Bellows 1970a, p 2) To understand this idea, one must remember that the political party formed while still under British rule. The Barisan Socialis is a further left-wing political party than the PAP, and has been regarded by the PAP as an organization for the communists. "In return for official recognition and official association with the government or government-controlled organizations, these groups can expect some consideration of their interests on the part of the state. The Barisan Socialis was the strongest political party that opposed the PAP. Another similarity between the dominant one-party systems of Mexico and Singapore is that the PRI uses a system in which representatives of different functional groups are brought together under the auspices of the state, called corporatism. The PAN played a cooperative role, until last summer when PAN won the presidential election. The PRI operates through an informal system of camarillos or political cliques.
Common topics in this essay:
PSUM PAN,
Barisan Socialis,
Malaysia PAP,
Singapore's PAP,
Singapore PAP,
Minister PAP,
PAP Democracy,
PAP PAP,
Institucional PRI,
Singapore PRI,
opposition parties,
political party,
barisan socialis,
opposition party,
party pap,
partido revolucionario institucional,
governmental services,
revolucionario institucional,
institucional pri,
political systems,
one-party system,
revolucionario institucional pri,
mp constituency constituency,
obtaining governmental services,
constituency constituency comes,
|
Acceptance Essays
