“The Good Society: An Introduction to Comparative Politics” by Alan Draper

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Have you ever asked yourself a question, “Do I live in the right place? Is this place good? What are these people like?” I bet you haven’t. We never do, taking our life for granted. But there is another approach. Now we shall see if it has some points to consider.

In his book “The Good Society: An Introduction to Comparative Politics” Alan Draper argues that the society has something to strive for to become better than it is. It is a point of self-perfection, you know. There is never a point at which you stop. But there is always something to change.

So what is the thing that makes society good? How can one check if it is not good enough? Whom should it be good for?

All these questions are rather easy to answer, according to Draper. The question of capability is the key to all of them. That is the basic point for dividing the nations into the ones with a high level of society development and those who still have something to strive for.

Now the first thing to say is that the good society is a democratic one (Draper, 34). He considers that the most important thing that influences the society id the political regime. Indeed, he has the point. Political structure is something that makes the basis for the society, and in case it is rotten, the whole foundation together with the building is doomed to go down. To illustrate this thesis, I would like to take some country with a totalitarian regime as an example. Let us remember the fascism in Italy. Tied hand and feet, people could not bear the system they were in, and the government deprived of the inner support could not stand the pressure rising up from the heart of the country.

Next I would like to talk about such a position as the capability of the country.

That very notion has several points that are the main ingredients of the capability of the country.

At first, the country must give as much freedom to its citizens as their democratic rights allow to.

Here, I would like to make an example of North Korea. People here are partially deprived of some rights that democratic countries provide their citizen, and thus the country is pushed way back in comparison to such democratically developed countries as the European ones, or Canada, or the Us.

When oppressed, people do not contribute to the country they live in.

I would also like to ponder over what capabilities implement a healthy society with no essential problems in its development.

These elements include, first, life. Indeed, a permanent fear of death can cause a severe damage to people’s consciousness and mind.

Then, it is bodily health and bodily integrity. The main feature of a human being that distinguishes them from animals is that a human never damages their body intentionally. Thus it is important to provide people with the environment in which they will not be concerned about them being hurt or wounded. In fact, that is why the state of war is considered an unnatural state to a man, exactly for its constant danger of death or injury.

The next concept is the one of senses, imagination and thought. I wonder what thoughts or senses might have those poor people enslaved by their own government and imagining only those things they are allowed by their state. This reminds me much of Orwell’s anti-utopia called “1984”, which tells a story of people whose very minds are controlled by the reigning party.

A nightmare for the western countries, this might prove a life experience for those states living in the totalitarian regime.

There is also a concept of practical reason that drives people to making a good society. Now tell me what practical reason could have the people who are afraid of saying or doing something wrong, of getting imprisoned for their own thoughts?

And speaking of the concept of affiliation, which means one is supposed to live towards the others and make a decent compatriot for the nation of his, I ask you if this is possible in the regime of distrust. I mean the distrust to the government that may delete you like a waste part and to the people who will not say a word if it does.

Of course, I am exaggerating, but this is the very case when exaggeration might do a good job. It can prevent the tragedies that are caused by the total control some nations are subdued to.

There is one more important thing I have almost forgotten about. Tell me, can slaves laugh? In fact, they don’t. And these are the most miserable people that don’t have even the simplest opportunity of all, which is to share the positive emotions.

And, finally, I would like to touch upon the interaction between the environment and the people. Those who cannot take control of themselves will never be able to take control over the world they live in. The nature, the other species and the scientific development will stay a mystery to them, and it will be absolutely impossible to go on with the further explorations. There is no opportunities for such countries but to stay stagnate as they are, trying to find their place in the world and slowly figuring out that their attempts lead them to nowhere.

In the modern world, a totalitarian regime is much of a boo to most people. It is a scary tale that is told at night to the naughties. Yet there are several countries whose regime could be positioned as totalitarian. Along with North Korea, these are Libya, a state in Africa where people are living for the sake of dying, since the political environment is the most upsetting, and so is the economical state; Myanmar, a state in Asia, known because of Burma located on its territory; people living there can be described as not quite realizing that they actually live. Sunken in the miseries of their lives, they are a shocking contrast to the prosperous European countries. Then I would like to mention Uzbekistan, where the government has seized power not only over the state, but also over the people. They cannot live a full life, yet they don’t even know that there is another way of building a society.

You might argue that these countries are not numerous and their impact on modern society is equal to zero. All that I can answer is that you have the point. These countries have very small influence in the world, and they never will make it stronger, due to their totalitarian regime. So it is very important to eliminate this regime somehow and make these countries stronger and more influential, more independent and grown-up.

Yet I am not speaking about the rude intrusion. What I mean is that we must not stay indifferent. We have to help people to get out of this mess and understand that there are more decent and bright ways to live.

Along with the capability as the “creative way to measure performance” (Draper, 47), there is something that we can add to the capability of these countries. Maybe all that they need is a helping hand stretched to them in the right time.

I wish we could know when the right time is. As Allan Draper said, “To make the abstract concepts concrete.” And then it will be possible to make the world a bit closer.

Works Cited

Draper, Alan, Ramsay, Ansil. The Good Society: An Introduction to Comparative Politics. New York NY: Longman Publishing Group, 2007. Print.

Click Here To Order Now!

“The Good Society: An Introduction to Comparative Politics” by Alan Draper

Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?

We have qualified writers to help you.

We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.

You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)