Comparative Politics
Some of the dependent variables in comparative politics include political stability, state capacity, political culture, and democracies. This paper discusses democracy variable, independent variables, and two constant variables. Freedom House is a non-governmental organization located in Washington D.C. It has numerous offices in many countries around the globe (Giannone, 2010). Freedom House has a Board of Trustees that encompasses business leaders, state officials, media, labor leaders, and scholars. Freedom House publishes a yearly report based on the degree of freedom in many nations and territories in dispute around the world. Freedom in the world survey evaluates global freedom within and outside the control of the government (Nandy, 2007). This freedom has the classification of political rights and civil liberties.
Political rights permit the citizens to access democracy as they engage in the political process such as free and fair elections (Giannone, 2010). This enables a legitimate election where the electorate can choose own choice of state officials. Similarly, one can join their own political organization without undue influence. Civil liberty enables citizens can freely express themselves by checking on the rule of law without government making any interference with the freedom of expression. This survey does not rate the government instead; it rates the freedom enjoyed by the people (Song, 2006). Freedom House upholds the legal rights by government and non-government bodies. Freedom House does not have a cultural-bound freedom. The methodology of this survey has the same basic standards that can apply in all countries around the globe.
Currently the process of research and analysis of the ratings entitles more than 60 analysts and many senior-level academic advisers (Bernhard, 2009). The analysts’ rely on a rich source of information from local and international reports in a country, academic analysis, non- governmental reports, and any other professional contacts. Advisory committee reviews the methodology of the report in collaboration with other experts. This committee deliberates on the methodological changes so as to ensure it adapts on the changes concerning political rights and civil liberties. The methodology introduces time series data to ensure comparability of yearly ratings.
Independent Variables
A. History
The Freedom House inception was in 1941 by Willkie and Roosevelt as a mouthpiece for democracy worldwide (Giannone, 2010). Other founders of the Freedom House include Bayard Swope, Ralph Bunche, Rex Stout, and Dorothy Thompson. President Delano popularized the Freedom house at a time of insurgency and acrimony in United States. Freedom House takes over the totalitarian threat as well as communism to drum up support for democracy to defeat the authoritarian ideologies. Freedom House criticizes dictatorial regimes such as that of Chile, apartheid in South Arica, war in Iraq and Afghanistan, genocide in Bosnia and Rwanda, and any other form of oppression (Nandy, 2007).
Freedom House champions for people to access democracy, in the religious practices, activists, trade, and the media. This organization prepares a world report to evaluate and assess the degree of political freedom and civil liberties. This report entitles the politicians, media fraternity, and policy makers to make own contributions and signature the report. In 1972, Freedom House launches Comparative Study of Freedom that assigns ratings of political rights and civil liberties to 151 countries and 45 territories (Song, 2006). This process attracts many analysts and senior academicians. Core members of the research team work in New York alongside consultants. Analyst uses a broad source of reference to generate the report such as academic analyses, foreign and domestic news reports, and other think tanks. The analysts propose country and territorial ratings for each report. Freedom House produces annual reports based on the freedom of the media and governance in the nations (Bernard, 2009). The freedom of the press elaborates media independence to assess the degree of broadcast, print, and internet freedom around the world. Individual country examines the political environment for the development of media that can influence reporting.
Control Variables
The N-search design is one of the control variables in comparative politics. This method has significant strengths since it has intersectional selection of cases. It can work as a substitute for the experimental control of the large N-designs. The intentional choosing of cases enables an easier method of hypothesis testing. This method when compared to the large statically method underlies concepts to enable low-level abstraction. The weakness of the comparative method or the small-N research design outweighs the benefits. Giannone (2010) says that selection of cases can only apply in experimental control. The N-design can result to insecure inferences due to the absence of rules of inquiry. Nandy (2007) finds the use of many variables with a small number of cases can also lead to incorrect inclusions. This problem occurs when the analyst uses few countries to compare many factors observed. The small-N analysis links variables not highlighted in the study and this lead to the use of many variables. To solve this problem of the use of many cases in the research use the small-N comparative method in tandem with the large-N statically method. Song (2006) explains that the large-N method has a degree of correlation due to the number of effective parties and the ethnic problems with systems in many countries. According to Song (2006), cross-sectional data collected from a sample of 54 elections around the world makes the following suggestion: Multivariate regression affects the independent variable as well as the dependent variable. The result is that the numbers of parties that appear depend on the permissiveness of the election.
References
Bernhard, M. (2009). Methodological Disputes in Comparative Politics. Comparative Politics, 41(4), 495-515.
(2005). Freedom House: press freedom survey, 2000. Choice Reviews Online , 38(08), 38-4294-38-4294.
Giannone, D. (2010). Political and ideological aspects in the measurement of democracy: the Freedom House case. Democratization, 17(1), 68-97.
Nandy, A. (2007). Cultures of politics and politics of cultures. Commonwealth & Comparative Politics , 22(3), 262-274.
Song, J. (2006). Historicization of Homeless Spaces: The Seoul Train Station Square and the House of Freedom. Anthropological Quarterly, 79(2), 193-223.
