The Rise of the European State and the Modern State

0 Comment

According to Garner, Ferdinand and Lawson (2009), strong democracies have full fledged institutions that function to dispense the will of the people, effectively. Normally, strong democracies do not only boast of institutions that are fully functioning, but also institutions that discharge the will of the masses. These institutions may include public, nongovernmental and even private institutions, albeit emphasis is placed on public institutions. For this cause, institutions that make up the judiciary, the legislature and the executive are highly considered if they meet the threshold or not. For instance, an event that clearly epitomizes the democratic nature of strong judicial and legislative institutions in the US. Herein, although these institutions effectively and consistently discharge their duties as outlined in the US Constitutions, yet they did not arrogate themselves the authority to make marriage amendments without the involvement of the US citizens. Resultantly, to decide the fate of homosexual marriages in North Carolina, North Carolinians were extended the ultimate decision through voting, on May 8th, 2012. Thus, one can see that the strength of democratic institutions is not only hinged upon consistent and effective discharging of mandate, but also upon proximity of such initiatives to the will of the public. The will of the public is important herein since the legitimacy of these institutions and the government’s authority emanates from their closeness to public will…. Mostly, this weakness emanates from the absence of checks and balance and separation of powers. This absence denudates the effectiveness of these institutions by breeding external interference. In most cases, it is the head of the executive who does the interference. In weak states, important institutions such as electoral commissions and courts of law are unable to operate with autonomy, leading to spates of post-election violence and acts akin to crimes against humanity. Again, these states may be weak enough to be infiltrated by sectarian interests, instead of serving the interests of the majority or the people (Rotberg, 2003). States in the International Community That May Be Considered Just Too Weak To Continue Demanding Recognition One of the countries that aptly fit the class of weak states is Somalia. The weakness of Somalia is evidenced by its inability to provide public or social goods such as security, despite the fact that it has all the instruments of coercion (the prison system, the police and the army). It is against this backdrop that large swathes of Somali land such as Jilib are still under the control of the Islamist organization, Harakat al-Shabaab al-Mujahedeen (commonly known as al-Shabaab). The ineffectiveness of the country is also underscored by the facts that: the presence and operation of al-Shabaab form a parallel government to that of Transitional Somali Government. and that foreign terrorist cells such as al- Qaeda are sponsoring al-Shabaab’s presence and operations in Somalia. The latter is the case since terrorists are bent on destabilizing Somalia as a strategic point to expand to Africa. The same also exposes the vulnerability of the Somali government since it