Tuesday, May 1, 2012

2012 - Question #9 – short answer/concept question



(A)          What is a prominent political cleavage in Russia?
(B)          How is that cleavage expressed (visible)?


See pp. 78-81 in What You Need to Know


Posted by at
Labels: ,

3 comments:

Ken Wedding said...

Let me begin with bits of my rubric for this question.

First, the question asks about Russia (not the Soviet Union).

Political cleavages are divisions between groups defined by policy or governing opinions or by political behavior.

Political cleavages include those between urban elites and rural/small town and city populations; divisions between Russians and minority populations; divisions between pro-economic restructuring proponents, advocates of vastly greater government involvement in the economy and social welfare programs, and the economic/political elite who wish to maintain their positions of wealth and power.

The cleavages are visible in less enthusiastic electoral support for United Russia outside of Leningrad and Moscow; protests in Moscow and other cities; the maneuvers to ensure electoral victories for United Russia; and active opposition to the government in areas dominated by non-Russian populations.

Here is a response offered from the anonymity of the Internet:

Political cleavages in Russia are relatively weak compared to other, older democratic countries, but the prominent political cleavage would be political ideologies and parties.

Although the USSR collapsed years back, introducing the democratic Russian Federation, the executive roles have changed very minimally. Putin has remained in office (whether that be as President or Prime Minister) for a very long time, refusing to allow others to compete fairly, and refusing to step down from office- even by altering the constitution in order to run for a third term in office. Every single political party besides that of Putin's has aligned together in order to force Putin's step down from office. Russia has even taken dramatic steps to sending its youth to political training camps- educating them in the ideology of Putin's political party, and paying children to protest the campaign of Putin's competition.
========================

References to the USSR are irrelevant and distracting. The assumption that cleavages are features only of "older, democratic countries" is mistaken. An examination of the cleavages in contemporary China should be enough to illustrate that point.

The statement that "the prominent political cleavage would be political ideologies and parties" seems to be identifying how the cleavage is visible, not what defines the cleavage. In identifying the cleavage, the response should have defined the policy differences between United Russia, the Liberal Democrats, the Communists, and the "reformers" (or those favoring economic restructuring).

Part A is worth one point for identifying "a prominent political cleavage…" However, this response does not do that.

Part B is worth two points for explaining how the cleavage is expressed. since Part A does not identify a cleavage, it is not possible for Part B to describe how we can recognize the cleavage.

Part B of the response also includes more reference to the USSR and incorrect analysis of the politics of contemporary Russia.

If you're going to refer to things like constitutional change, be sure you are accurate.

If you're going to refer to things like NASHI's summer camps, be sure you know who sponsored them and for what purposes. That's not clear from this response.

May 3, 2012 at 10:58 AM
Ken Wedding said...

An Austrian(?) response:

"One political cleavage that can be found in Russia is the division between the social elites and the common rural people.

"The oligarchs and the nomenklatura elite occupy powerful political, economic and governmental positions, which give them a lot of authority to influence the media to support a certain political party or leader, or manipulate the economy to their benefit.

"These elites contrast greatly with the vast majority of the rural population, or even just the individuals who are not prominent figures. These everyday Russians usually have little faith or trust in the government and Russian politics, and do not have much regard for civil society or nationalism.

"The great division and conflict between these two social groups have been expressed in the lack of political participation outside industrialised cities such as Moscow and the polls that state that the majority of Russian citizens are not satisfied with their current regime."
==========================

A 3-point question; 1 for identifying a prominent cleavage and up to 2 points for explaining how that cleavage is "visible."

The identification of the politico-economic division is very good.

The explanation of visibility is also good; the ownership of authority, the manipulation of the economy, the lack of civic trust and participation are good signs.

This response earns all three of the possible points.

May 10, 2012 at 3:55 PM
Ken Wedding said...

Another response from the anonymity of the Internet:

"A Political cleavage can be defined as a division between groups defined by policy or governing opinions or by political behavior. A common political cleavage being faced currently in Russia would be the separation between the ones in power and the society.

"We see evidence of political cleavages through the current political separation between the ones in power and the people.

"Currently, As Putin is the one in power; we have seen through history that some elections were not “democratic”. As Putin has been in power as the President and also having been the Prime Minister of Russia, it is somewhat acceptable to believe that the election might have been rigged. This can be considered as a political cleavage as this divides the citizens of Russia to the government by far which would create an illiberal democracy. The citizens might have the ability to vote but their votes will not affect anything such as the elections in 2012 May."
=============================

This response begins with a great definition that was not asked for.

Then comes the identification of a prominent cleavage in Russia as one "between the ones in power and the society." Okay, I think I know what that means, but compare that with the identification in the previous response. This one is not as clear in its meaning. I think it's worth a point, but it's close to not earning a point.

Then comes the assertion that "it is somewhat acceptable to believe that the election might have been rigged" because "Putin is the one in power…" That one needs more explanation. Why does Putin's occupancy of a position of power make it "somewhat acceptable" to think that the recent election was rigged. Don't you need more evidence?

And why would that "be considered as a political cleavage"? Read what comes next carefully. "… this divides the citizens of Russia to the government by far which would create an illiberal democracy." Divides citizens TO the government? And even if I guess that what the responder meant was dividing citizens FROM the government, why does that "create an illiberal democracy"?

Here again, the exam reader can only read the words on the paper. Guesses about what was in the respondent's head cannot be evaluated.

There are times when people write too much. This is an example of a time when more needed to be written.

Honest, you do have time (well, 90%+ of you have time) to write an outline of your response in the margin of the question sheet. You do have time to proofread your writing. And you can cross things out and add things after writing your original response. Do it. Even if you wait until you've written responses to all the questions, you can do it. And waiting might make it easier to proofread your own writing.

This question earns 1 point for the identification, but no points for explaining/describing how that cleavage is visible.

[By the way, I proofread this and made 3 important changes. I still might have missed something. You can tell me.]

May 10, 2012 at 4:12 PM

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)