(A) What is a prominent parastatal in one of the countries you studied?
(B) Does that parastatal promote or inhibit democratization?
(C) How?
See pp. 42 and 61-62, 71-12, 97, 137, or 143-145 in What You Need to Know
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
From Colorado comes this response:
The National Iranian Oil Company is headed by the Ministry of Petroleum in Iran and controls the nations oil and natural gas reserves. The parastatal promotes democratization because it took control of the country's natural resources, out of the hands of foreign companies. This gave Iran control over it's economic future and promoted civilian rule.
=====================
This response earns a point for correctly identifying a parastatal in Iran.
However, the argument supports the idea that the parastatal promoted Iranian sovereignty, not democracy. Independence and the ability of the state to control its own affairs is not the same as allowing citizens to have a controlling voice in the making of laws and policy.
This response earns 1 of 3 possible points.
Another response from Colorado:
A. Nigeria's Oil National Company- (I didn't remember the name, looked it up, sorry) : Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation.
B. Inhibits.
C. Just as all the other oil companies in the Delta region, NNPC uses violence to suppress the demands of the people of the area. Unlike others, though, it can use Nigerian army with more bureaucratic or technical ease. Like the multinationals, it allocates the profits to the capital, and does not account for the externalized costs. It is undemocratic because it has the access to the legal violence in use of suppression.
===================
Of course you won't be able to look up the name of the parastatal if you don't remember it, but if you accurately describe it in a generic way, you'll probably get credit. Thus, a statement that "Nigeria has a public/government-owned oil company that controls oil production and sales." would probably get credit given the way this question is phrased.
The logic of the argument in part C is undermined a bit by confusing prose and complex reasoning. If the student had time to look up the name of the NNPC, that person could have taken a few extra minutes to organize thought and words.
The key is assert that the NNPC has "access to the legal violence," although legal power might be a better term. While externalities are ignored, that doesn't seem relevant. But directing profits to the national government and suppressing protest in the delta, are examples of anti-democratic actions.
This response would earn 3 of a possible 3 points.
Post a Comment