System analysis and our quasi democracy

By : Shamsuddin Muhammad

Gabriel Almond, and David Easton, two well known American political scientists were the first to use system analysis approach for the study of politics in their popular books " Comparative Politics : A developmental approach" and " A system Analysis of Political Life" both published in 1966 respectively. Gebriel's concept of political system consists of inputs conversion process, outputs and feedback. He maintains that governments receive demands, support as well as apathy from opposing actor from domestic and foreign environment of the entity where demands serve as energy and raw material to process them accordingly. Larger demands which shows that people want action either come in the form of public opinions, parties, pressure and interest groups, media talk shows and public demonstrations on one hand and the within internal environment itself such as constitutional nature, values and procedures and norms of government on the other. Generally, out of thousands of demands mere few hundred demands, expectations, needs, desires and proposals gets attention to get done that helps to avoid any overburden on conversion or process phase with the help of intermediaries like preferences and interests, opinion, mass media, taboos, political socialization, and pressure groups. Almond identifies an integral attribute of apathy in terms of few people who do not participate in political processes;thus fewer are participants lesser the inputs or demands and very few out puts in the form of new legislation, rules, and other policy developments through allocation and authoritative decisions. Gabriel Almond on the other hand through comparative political approach describe the process of transformation from traditional structure to modern democratic state.In contrast to David who was largely influenced by sociological approach like that of Max Weber or social system theory, Gabriel focused on change and a comprehensive frame work for analysis to deal with the political phenomena regardless of culture, degree of modernization, and size of societies in modern times. Under the influence of behavioral movement, instead of using terms such as government, state and nation he used the term political system in order to absolve the term from the legal and institutional limitations; and structurally more accurate and universally accepted where each part of the system is dependent on other , whether social, economic, ecological or political. Thus, political system, according to him as a flow of interaction consists of sources of demands or inputs coming both from people for regulation of behavior in terms of provision of facilities like education, health market control and demand for real participation in political process and decision making as well as policy communication. One of important contribution of Almond in his model is 'outcomes' factor which is consequences of policy output in decision that receive due feed back differently at different levels. With the growing level of awareness and excessive pressure on from within society induces a political system to redistribute national income,opportunity, ensure equality before law, fraternity and honor which ultimately leads it towards a welfare state.But such as metaphor only possible in cumulative revolutions not in ordinary circumstances. Almond writes, "the major issue in thrid world nations is cumulative revolutions they are facing; People demand national unity, greater participation,economic empowerment, law and order immediately".
The above both models of analysis were presented during the culmination of cold war between Communist and Capitalist blocks backed by respective doctrines.Apart from the legitimacy of either school of thought, humanity remained largely at loss.Communist doctrine that hindered the uneven flow and concentration of wealth of few hands prospered within a short span of time in agrarian societies of Asia, Eastern Europe and South America where mass revolutions overthrew monarchies to bring social justice, equality and opportunity.Nevertheless, besides other economic factors, excessive tendencies of centralization, concentration of powers in the Secretary General of Bulsoviek party and monopoly gradually deviated from vary principles of communist doctrine of empowerment of working class transformed into single party dictator ship-averse to Stalin's dream that finally led to disintegration of Union of Socialist Republic of Russia (USSR). On the other hand, capitalist societies in order to keep the tendencies in their favor introduced various welfare initiatives in their countries to cope the emerging challenge of increasing gulf between have and have nots. Capitalists economies with all possible mean to consolidate fully against the mass revolutions by harnessing private ownership drives.Such tendencies under the aegis of big economic powers resulted into globalization where applies the rule of survival of fittest.Industrial revolution with most of positive attributes brought few negative consequences and among them one was lack of proper mechanism of distribution of wealth among the factors of production. Feudal and barons having large properties gradually turned into industrialists who with the help of imperialistic desings and exploitation of labour with the help of clergy dominated the scene that justified uneven distribution of income between employer and employee. Despite of high claims of modern democracies,they still unable to decrease gap between two portions of world population rather intensified after economic meltdown started from Lehman of US imply for wider adjustments and reforms in traditional capitalist doctrine. On national level, policies have had little consideration for poor rather they served the interests of feudal lords, pressure groups, business tycoons and elite classes. The majority of general population is dormant and largely adhere to religious affiliations,suffer conservatism and greedy for short term benefits. Moreover successive copes and overthrowing of representative regimes, though allegedly involved in corruption,by military dictators created a feeling of political uncertainty. None of the party succeeded to bring change in poor life except hollow slogans. Rulers of the country have formulated laws to justify corruption to secure their seats while masses are no more than scape goats read o the alter of anti poor policies evident from government's apathy against haphazard increase in prices of electricity, necessities and petroleum products thus giving freedom to production and marketing companies of aforementioned products. In such a scenario mere hope left alone that give us courage to leave fore hope is second name of life. Our governments should formulate certain policies that bring change in monotonous society where weak is further subjugating and stronger is getting further strong and mighty as well as secured by state law.