Thank you for your support. Please help me to have it done today.
Besides, Please do for me another favor!
I have to have a short comment/idea to my 2- classmate for their discussions. Please help me to have your comments on what my classmates did. I will send you these information later if you don't mind. Thanks!
Hello, I see you removed posts for which you wanted comment. Do you still need that? I am available for next few hours. If you still need comment, please post the posts.
If possible, please give me your comment on a friend of mine did. Just a short paragraph to express your idea.
The thing he did as follows:
Where have military regimes successfully developed Third World economies and where have they failed to do so? What seems to account for the difference?
Many developing countries have had and continue to have military governments; even advanced industrial democracies have produced leaders with military backgrounds. A number of U.S. presidents have been former military leaders; but they only assumed office after retiring from military service. Until the last two decades of the twentieth century, military governments were common in many Third World countries.
The success or failure of a military regime depends upon the type of regime that has taken power. For instance, “a personalistic regime is one in which a military officer has taken control of a government for his own personal interests.” It is usually a dictatorship in which the military uses state control and plunder to stay in power. “Idi Amin’s dictatorship over Uganda is a good example of this.” Another regime that can be just as brutal and as corrupt as a personalistic regime is an institutional regime.
“ Institutional regimes are not as self serving and will most likely be governed collectively. Some Institutional Regimes have a single leader who serves a limited term in office. Usually they advocate an understandable political ideology. And an Institutional Regime will most likely support national causes. The primary objectives of Institutional Regimes are:
- the promise to rid the country of corruption;
- they seek to restore social order;
- they seek to advance military corporate interests; and
- the promise to stimulate the economy”
Industrialization is seen as a way to achieving at least some of these goals, not least of all because it promotes national pride and international prestige. There are a couple of other military regimes (Bureaucratic Authoritarian Regime and Revolutionary Regimes) but the aforementioned ones, I feel, are most notable. The promises that the regimes put out there for civilians sometimes succeed and sometimes fail.
For example, ridding an LDC of corruption rarely appears to happen, if indeed it happens at all. However, there has been very much success when it comes to defending military corporate interest. But when a military is in control, generally military spending is not. And justification of military rule can not be acquired if there is excessive military spending. Also economic stimulation of the economy cannot be achieved if excessive military spending is not controlled. The nature of the military is to restore order. In this respect, the military would be very effective in restoring social order. The downside to restoring social order may sometimes come at a price. Hundreds or even thousands of civilians are sometimes injured or killed in the process along with the large scale destruction of property.
When does a military regime succeed and when does it fail? And what accounts for the difference? A military regime succeeds where it excels and that is maintaining social order. A military regime also is effective when it comes to a show of force with the protected country’s interest in perspective. But most times, fail mode come in to play when attempting to perform political and economic tasks. This is so because these tasks are outside the scope of a military training.
, Handelman, H. (2011). Soldiers and politics / personalistic regimes. In The challenge of third world development (p. 253).
Boston, MA: Pearson Learning Solutions.
 Handelman, H. (2011). Soldiers and politics / institutional regimes. In The challenge of third world development (pp. 254 - 257).
Thanks in advance!