The Great Lakes Invitational Conference Association

Authoritarianism and Democracy

Authoritarianism and Democracy

Over the past 300 years, with the decline of regional and global empires and the rise of nation-states, democracy has emerged as the world’s foremost political system. Principles of democracy are enshrined throughout the UN Charter, as well as many of the UN’s other foundational documents. In the context of the developing world, many nations have been encouraged to implement aspects of democracy into their political system to allow for governments representative of the people’s desires. Indeed, the prevalence of democratic systems has arguably led to greater economic progress and sociopolitical success within the nation in question.  However, while the power of the people to elect their own representatives into office is democracies’ greatest feature, it can also become its greatest weakness. It has become evident that democracy is not a foolproof path to political and economic stability. In fact, the introduction of democratic processes has, in some scenarios, led to instability and the rise of authoritarian regimes to compensate. Authoritarianism, of course, relies on the strict enforcement of law and centralized power, with certain limits on personal freedoms which, in the midst of instability, may better ensure future stability.

 

It is the responsibility of the UNDP to address the rising tide of authoritarianism in the midst of failing attempts at democracy. From the judicial crisis in Poland, to drug-related violence endorsed by the central government of the Philippines, and to the burgeoning maelstrom of Venezuelan politics, the rise of authoritarian actions from democratically elected individuals has been observed in numerous cases across the globe. This trend can be detrimental to the potential development of each nation, because political and social stability is of the upmost importance to attract physical and monetary investment essential to growth. Without this stability, development often remains stagnant or unsustainable at best. This issue is also not limited to countries typically considered to be in the category of “developing nations.” Mature economies such as the Russian Federation have likely stagnated, politically and economically, as a result of authoritarian politics. Even in the United States, some have argued that the Trump administration’s combative and uncompromising governing style has corroded institutions of democratic governance, particularly the free press. If true, this could portend a rise in authoritarian tendencies that could, in the long term, have negative consequences for the country’s economic health. Both democratic and authoritarian systems have the potential for stability, yet it has been apparent that radical changes in any political system – arguably more likely in a brittle authoritarian system – can lead to power vacuums and instability.

 

To properly address this issue, it is necessary to consider solutions to political problems that deter development within a nation. Additionally, the participation of citizens in the democratic process can complicate these issues, by allowing them to choose leadership without full knowledge of the consequences their choice holds. The question then becomes, do citizens know what is in their best interest, or does authoritarianism save them from their own ignorance? Currently, the concern for the committee and the international community is that political instability has deterred investment and caused stagnant growth, preventing the UNDP from achieving its goal of Sustainable Development. To address this problem, it is essential to discuss failings of the democratic process, when desired stability and development are not forthcoming. On that point, what is the appropriate response to the hindrance of such progress, and what are its root causes? What can be done to enhance stability and forestall the rise of authoritarian tendencies?

  • HarrisonCentner
    HarrisonCentner November 12, 2017 Reply

    United Nations Development Programme
    Authoritarianism and Democracy
    Kingdom of Norway
    Harrison Karl Centner

    Emerging nations, across the globe, especially in Sub-Saharan Africa, have evidenced the advantages of democracy in their governments. African states, including South Africa and Mali, previous economic stagnation and debt crisis have ended since the proliferation of democratic elections. Democracies, however, do not create perfect states, they have the potential for instability in both economy and government. Conversely, authoritarian states, regimes which disallow participation in government, are more likely to possess stable governments and economies but can lead to oppression and the encroachment the human rights of their citizens. Amidst turmoil in the Middle East and Asia, brought upon by authoritarian states, particularly North Korea and Syria who continue to violate the human rights of their citizens, the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) must recognize the legitimacy of the rights of the human persons. In addition, the recognition that, a free press is a sine qua non of a flourishing government. Acknowledging the aforesaid, the United Nations must determine necessary actions to protect the rights of persons across the globe while maintaining stable governments.

    Since Norway’s conception, democratic values have been central to the government and the citizens who uphold it. Norway is hailed consistently as the most democratic state by democracy indices around the globe, including the Economist Intelligence Unit, Freedom House, and others. Although Norway functions as a democracy, the state has remained stable, indicating democracies have the potential to create governments and economies free of excess fluctuation. This is in large part credited to Norway’s free press and fierce opposition to authoritarian tendencies. ¨Freedom of [expression and press] is the very foundation of democracy. The right to seek and receive information and to express opinions is a prerequisite for participating in society and political life¨(Statsministerens Kontor). Recently, Norway has made strides in increasing freedom of the press through legislation and advocacy. The UN Plan of Action on the Safety of Journalists and the Issues of Impunity and other UN plans have been supported and progressed with the help Norway. Sustained efforts have also been made to end the killing of journalists. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs ¨plays a leading role in international efforts to promote free and independent media, particularly in conflict areas and countries where democracy is under pressure¨ (Statsministerens Kontor). Norway’s vicious defense of the media has been confirmed by recent reports that within recent years, zero journalists have been killed, targeted for murder, or murdered with impunity in Norway(Reporters Without Borders).

    Central to the stable development of economies and states is the free press. Norway recommends the support of all countries in the effort to ensure personal liberties protected by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. This includes Article 21, which states: “Everyone has the right to take part in the government of his country, directly or through freely chosen representatives.” It is imperative that this UN Committee addresses the issues of safeguarding democratic nations and thereby protecting freedom of expression, which is fundamental to sustainable growth. Norway leads in the protection of journalism and encourages all nations to follow suit, in order to combat rising authoritarian tendencies and perpetuate sustainable development. We petition this committee to address the rising tides of authoritarianism and sustainable growth by passing a resolution advancing journalistic rights and freedom of expression. Explicitly, Norway urges all countries to impose harsher punishments for journalistic assaults, moreover, Norway proposes a UN investigative committee to analyze and report on the state of freedom of expression and free press in oppressive governments.

  • IraqUNDP
    IraqUNDP November 13, 2017 Reply

    Following the end of the oppressive Hussein regime in 2003 the Iraqi people emerged from the darkness of authoritarianism and took their first step as a free people: a free and open election. Since that time Iraq has slowly begun to create a more stable economy, while promoting growth and scaling down weapons development, along with being ever mindful of growing terrorist threats in the region. Additionally, due to leftovers from Hussein’s government corruption has begun to spread across Iraq. Although nowhere near the levels some claim it to be, it is undoubtedly present. Iraq has seen first hand the disastrous effects an authoritarian leader can have on a country, and wishes to help those currently suffering under dictators, and especially working to prevent future dictators from cropping up.

    When it comes to actual solutions to the long term crisis, Iraq is looking for a careful solution that deters authoritarianism, without further destroying countries that are already authoritarian. Additionally, Iraq wishes to avoid destroying already struggling economies in third world countries who could be turning towards authoritarianism. However, Iraq again wishes to remind delegates that a solution must be found to counter rising authoritarian leaders in countries across the world, as long as that solution is not simply economic sanctions with no meaningful steps.

    While Iraq is wholeheartedly engaged in weakening the iron authoritarian grip of dictators on impoverished countries, it does not seek to harm the people of those countries while attempting to help them. Action we take, especially in regards to sanctions, should be targeted at the leaders of the authoritarian countries, and not the people of it. Namely, Iraq would like the committee to look for possible ways to help countries fight corruption in their nation. Additionally, Iraq would like to provide some relief for struggling relatively new democracies, in order to strengthen them and fortify them against authoritarianism in the region and in its people.

  • Ty77723
    Ty77723 November 13, 2017 Reply

    SUBMITTED TO: UNDP
    FROM: Tajikistan
    SUBJECT: Authoritarianism and Democracy

    Throughout the world, democracy and authoritarianism has been debated and questioned. Authoritarianism has been seen to have growing support and influence in even some of the more traditionally democratic nations. For example, in recent French and German elections, we have seen an increased support for more authoritarian parties than seen before. Supporters of these parties have claimed that their democracies have failed to help and benefit them. With the increase of authoritarian support, this leads to the question if democracy is truly the best for development.
    Tajikistan understands the positive outcomes from an authoritarian government. An authoritarian governments regime exists with policy goals that can result to change, say, eradicating corruption in government. This type of governance is effective in a country where the previous government was not able to solve problems like insurgency, unemployment and corruption. With that however, Tajikistan has had its development slowed by forces outside of its government. With the threat of terrorism and other crimes like drug trafficking, Tajikistan has had to redirect their focuses to stabilize the nation. Tajikistan has also been under threat of being sanctioned by countries like the United States for not meeting standards of freedom. As countries blame Tajikistan for its instability and economic stagnation, obstacles to development have been placed in Tajikistan’s way, blocking what is needed for development.
    With everything in mind, there are many questions for the committee to answer. Does authoritarianism have a place government when it comes to the development of a nation? What can we do to help countries with threats to stability, like civil wars and terrorism? What will we do in order to stop actions that are hurting and stagnating development of other nations?
    In order to answer these questions, we will have to be open-minded to other governmental ideologies like authoritarianism as a viable option for a nation’s development. Instead of denouncing nations with low stability, which does not help any party involved, the committee must find ways to help those nations reach stability. Lastly, the committee must call on themselves to end any actions stagnating development in other countries, like sanctions. How this will happen requires more debate in the committee, but these are the three basic criteria that must be included in a successful resolution.
    This committee provides an opportunity to change how we see development. We no longer have to treat democracy as the only option to develop, but we can recognize the many other ways of developing and work with all countries on the a way to success, and stop the things that are preventing those countries from success. Tajikistan is looking forward to discussing and debating how we can achieve these things with other countries in this committee, and finding a productive solution for all countries.

  • Faithschafer
    Faithschafer November 14, 2017 Reply

    Country: Portugal
    Committee: UNDP
    Topic: Authoritarianism and Democracy
    Delegate: Faith Schafer
    School: Williamston High School

    The problem of determining a proper democratic system lies in the opinions and decisions of the people. Countries have struggled with the decision to move to democracy for centuries, and when the transition has been made, these same countries find their development faltering, their paths to the economic stability they dreamed of and expected not appearing. They also may find them in a politically unstable nation because the process to democracy takes longer than anticipated, or the country is split between problems. Citizen participation will be necessary to complete these desires and bring the country into economic and political stability, but citizen cooperation and willingness to work with the elected officials of the country may prove to be more important to the success of the democracy and the country’s political system as a whole.
    Portugal has struggled with democracy over the last century, debating over the various candidates and eventual leaders that ran the country for years. The main problem with all of these leaders was that none of them were able to achieve a majority or the people’s consent to have them run the country, because there were always too many candidates, splitting the vote of the people. Many of the candidates supported various policies from Marxism to Socialism to Communism, and the country split their votes between all the parties. Most candidates were able to win with less than fifty percent of the vote, creating difficulty and unrest among the majority of people that did not have their candidate win the political election. As a result, many public programs and economic advancement faltered because the people were dissatisfied with the people in charge of their government. This caused them to focus more on protesting and trying to remove their current leaders rather than helping them pass laws that would benefit their country. However, Portugal sees the importance of creating an organized and fair democratic system in developing countries, and they are willing to work with countries to create a good environment for this to occur.
    Portugal, along with the EU, has carried out several processes to improve democracy in other countries wishing to develop a more fair government system. One element of this new system that has been most beneficial is the creation of Election Observations, where a committee will look over the election process for each country. This is to make sure that countries practicing democratic processes are holding elections fairly, without fear of people editing results. Countries participating in this oversee elections and make sure that elections are carried out fairly and neatly, with the results properly reflecting the expression of the citizens. This also limits disparity between elections in different regions and countries, and has been most beneficial. Portugal urges that all countries adopt similar plans to allow for the fair transition to democracy, and to ensure that all countries with existing democratic systems enjoy a fair political gains for their country. If the United Nations adopted a policy like this, all countries would feel reassured about how they were voting, and they would know that they were safe from threats like voter fraud. The United Nations can enact these systems on countries opposed to a system like this by the promise that it will make the election process fairer and safer, and the United Nations will pay for the creation of Election Observations in countries that cannot afford them. The UN will also oversee the process in cases requested by the country, to preserve national sovereignty and ensure that all election processes are equal. This system, though costly, should ensure that democratic systems around the world are representing their people to the best of their ability.

  • Hudsonyu
    Hudsonyu November 14, 2017 Reply

    Country: The Bolivian Republic of Venezuela
    Committee: UNDP
    Topic: Authoritarianism and Democracy
    Delegate: Hudson Yu

    The constant struggle between authoritarianism and democracy has been at the center of global politics since the formation of democratic government. The doctrine of democracy, which parades government representation of its people’s desires, has failed in practice time and time again. In many cases, fragile democracies established in developing nations have transitioned to authoritarian control. This has been exemplified by the collapse of democracies in Thailand, Turkey, Bangladesh, and Nicaragua. As a committee, our body must evaluate the role that increased government supervision may play in development, and asses how civil liberties may help or hinder sustainable growth.

    A political system that improves living standards, raises incomes, and reduces poverty can reasonably be considered successful. Bearing this in mind, the delegation of Venezuela raises a profound question- does the method with which these ends are achieved warrant the infringement of national sovereignty?The nation of Venezuela is no stranger to political turmoil. Under its democratic system of government, some of its citizens are clearly not suited to the responsibilities that come with individual political power and civil liberties. Under Venezuela’s constitution, all of its citizens are guaranteed freedom of speech, yet they choose to riot violently. However, this issue extends beyond Venezuela’s own borders. In 2002, the United States government attempted to facilitate a coup through its support of insurgency in local media, going as far as to support private media organizations that openly backed a coup. In response to this, Venezuela’s government retains a light influence over its state media. After all, a government that is mindful of the welfare of its citizens has every reason to operate the media in order to provide accurate and reliable news. In light of this anecdote, it is important to be cognizant of the many factors that are at play when nations make “auhtoritarian” policy moves and to consider that seemingly authoritarian governments can be the most democratic.

    Finally, the delegation of Venezuela invites the international community to reconsider their preconceived notions in regards to government. Government influence of certain facets of society is in many cases, justified, as well as necessary. Under close examination, increased government control instills discipline in its citizens due to more efficiently enforced laws. This promotes societal order and therefore streamlines the process of development. Additionally, development can be promoted under economic supervision from the government because it can prevent monopolies, which can easily rise up in developing nations, hindering healthy economic competition and growth. Government control can also extend to pice floors, which are in many cases necessary to preserve growing industries. Finally, with increased executive control, having clear policy goals and accelerated law making processes can lead to rapid development because faster executive decisions generally lead to faster change. By and large, it is important to remember the right to national sovereignty possessed by every nation, and as a body, not to attempt to govern outside of our own respective borders.

  • Erinbowling12
    Erinbowling12 November 14, 2017 Reply

    Country: Burkina Faso
    Committee: UNDP
    Topic: Authoritarian and Democracy
    Delegate: Erin Bowling
    School: Williamston High School

    The debate between authoritarian and democracy styles of government has been a everlasting struggle in global politics ever since these two very different styles emerged. More recently The Nation of Burkina Faso has transitioned to a democracy and as a committee, we would like to evaluate how this system protects human rights and promotes freedom by representing the people it works for. A government should be for the people, and for what the people want. What the people want is a voice, basic human rights, and freedom to live how they choose. Once these rights are taken away from them quality of life dramatically decreases at the dispense of a select few and slightly higher income. Burkina Faso would like to beg the question, how is this better?
    Although the nation of Burkina Faso is new to this system, we see no reason to ever to go back to a totalitarian state. The citizens of our country have fought for their right to this form of government, and the oppressive land we once knew is now but a distant memory beside our bright new future. Burkina Faso is slowly beginning to build our country back up to the standard we know we can achieve and the transition is going amazing. The new found freedoms our people are now experiencing are life changing and revolutionary. No man deserves to be controlled under authoritarian rule and should get a say in their life in all aspects.
    The Nation of Burkina Faso urges the international community to continue their push for a democratic world and enjoy the freedoms it offers. We can look to many of our world powers and developed democratic nations to see how this can help a country flourish and thrive. Democratic states will always have freer people than authoritarian states. With the right to elect representatives and leaders to further the success of their nation comes a thriving and happy society, while also obtaining more freedom of speech and expression than under authoritarian rule. The biggest virtue of Democracy is that it is government by the people for the people. Unlike other forms of government, democracy is about the little man, focused on everyone rather than the elite that are often disconnected from how everyone else lives their lives.

  • Abbiemorrow
    Abbiemorrow November 14, 2017 Reply

    United Nations Development Programme
    Authoritarianism and Democracy
    Turkey
    Abbie Morrow

    Democracy is the most common government used across the world. It is effective because it includes the citizens’ participation in government. Problems have occurred in some countries due to controlling and censoring democracies resulting in a shift to authoritarian government.This is important to address because some countries who claim that they have democracies are oppressing their citizens. Countries like this include North Korea and Syria; these countries are both authoritarian regimes. Authoritarianism is important to address for Turkey because we are known to be authoritarian. In reality, we are a parliamentarian, middle-eastern democracy, not a western democracy. Our president Recep Tayyip Erdogan stated, “Democracy is a product of western culture, and it cannot be applied to the Middle East which has a different cultural, religious, sociological and historical background.” The United Nations has no use looking further into our country. Turkey is a strong democracy of it’s own and not authoritarian.

    Authoritarianism is not an issue in Turkey because we are our own form of democracy. Turkey has been cooperative with the United Nations since we joined in 1945. The history of our Middle Eastern Democracy began when the Grand National Assembly declared Turkey a democracy in 1923. This declaration was put into action after the Turkish empire had an independence war against foreign occupation and rule of the Sultan. Our country believes that democracy cannot be imposed, it must come from the will of the people. Turkey is doing everything that is best for our citizens. For example, Turkey has gone to extreme measures of putting terrorist groups on trial; these groups include the Gulen Movement and Kurdish Separatist factions. Activists can be put into prison for 15 years. Turkey has cracked down on anyone suspected to have ties to these groups for the well being of our country. In order to do this, our government needs to be strong. Some neighboring countries have similar problems with terrorists and stronger governments are needed. When Iraq tried to have a democracy it failed horribly because Middle Eastern countries are not suited for this form of government. In reality, our country is a Middle Eastern democracy because western democracies are myths in the Middle East.

    Turkey recommends that in order to enhance the stability of countries in the Middle East, the United Nations consider the need for more powerful governments. We need a forceful government in order to function as a unified country. Strong regimes are able to exercise their power and influence their citizenry and allies or enemies in effective ways. Turkey proposes that the United Nations Development Programme respects our Middle Eastern democracy and does not impose any form of government on Turkey. Turkey implores that the United Nations budgets its time on matters of true significance, rather than issues like the growth of strong governmental tendencies or authoritarianism.

  • November 14, 2017 Reply

    Committee: UNDP
    Topic: Authoritarianism and Democracy
    Country: The United States of America
    Delegate: Avneet Deol, Forest Hills Eastern High School

    To the last drop of ink and the last leap of innovation that oozes out of the United States of America, we will foster the principles of democracy. Although the United States’ representative democracy and free press has aged since the fourth of July in 1776, it is nonetheless secure, dependable, and fortified. The growth of authoritarian tendencies, however, is appalling. Countries are abandoning their enduring and unfading principles; they are abandoning democracy and suffering for it. The Democratic Republic of the Congo is in limbo. President Kabila and his country are delaying elections, a pillar of democracy. It is not a democracy unless the people’s voices are heard. Every day, displaced women in the DRC fear being assaulted or their children being abducted. The USA will not condone elections be put off any longer. The government of South Sudan has also lost our trust. A government that assumes a mountain of power and that does not respect all of its people cannot be sustained. The Nguenyyiel refugee camp in Ethiopia alone is home to over 86,000 South Sudanese refugees. Authoritarian notions restrict freedom, inhibit voices, and corrupt governments.

    The United States of America has already dedicated billions of dollars to the strengthening and development of democracy. In 2016 alone, the United States Agency for International Development used 2.4 billion dollars for democracy and governance programs. In addition, being a living, breathing example of a triumphant democracy (along with Australia, Canada, Ireland, Germany, the United Kingdom, South Korea, and more) encourages other political regimes to want to imitate our democracy. The USA hopes that other countries can also set examples and provide funding to support the end of the outbreak of threatening authoritarian principles. The USA hopes that the world can flourish through the support of the people it serves.

    Advancing into the future, the USA encourages that countries, especially those that have already adopted democratic principles, first and foremost understand and cherish the idea of popular sovereignty. The Democratic power lies with the people and within communities. From there, the people can determine where portions of the power should be held. Second, decisions should be made locally – as close to communities as possible – and the aggregate decision will be solidified. The government is responsible for every person and place it serves. Thirdly, democracies should be clear and understandable in their policies. There should be clear and defined lines of accountability in every policy that is enforced. Fourth, all communities must be able to participate in decision making that affects their lives and community. Fifth, like checks and balances in the USA, every sphere of government has to support the others in order to maintain the balance of power and interdependence. Finally, the government’s primary objective is to improve opportunities and outcomes for the individuals and communities that empower it.

  • Roymorelloa90
    Roymorelloa90 November 14, 2017 Reply

    14 November 2017
    SUBMITTED TO: United Nations Development Programme
    FROM: Namibia
    SUBJECT: Authoritarianism and Democracy

    The differences in global regimes have a profound impact on both individual and the greater-scale economies of the international system. In particular, debates pertaining to authoritarian regimes and democratic nations put forth new issues that need to be considered. Through time, democracy has emerged as the foremost governmental system. Throughout the globe, this governing style has taken over. Democratic parties have been able to make major, positive changes on African countries. The United Nations, neighboring governments, allies and P5 nations have encouraged many countries to adopt aspects of democracy into their their constitutions to allow citizens’ voices to be represented. Despite the fact that democracies have flaws, namely inefficiency, relevance and sustainability with regards to development, the Republic of Namibia continues as a democracy and focuses on the freedoms of its people.

    Looking at both governing styles, authoritarianism is the principle of blind submission to authority opposed to the democratic system of government which delegates authority. Democracy encourages participation and empowers citizens whereas authoritarian regimes stifle the descent of citizens, even if they represent a voice of reason. Despite the risks and oppressions under authoritarian regimes, democratic nations may be falling under threat. Younger nations use the defining traits of democracy to manipulate media, threaten freedoms and pass legislation to cement their power. Older democratic nations are setting poor examples with unbalanced budgets, legal issues and low approval ratings. While the young democracies are barely democratic and the old face struggles, Asian authoritarianism has gained traction among many who seek success. The growth of the nations under strict rule are intriguing because a select few individuals decide on a strict path of development for the entire nation. To them this poses a viable alternative. As democratic nations expand in numbers, Namibia realizes democracy may lead to instability and the rise of more extremely powerful authoritarian regimes.

    Before 1990, Namibia was under white minority control bolstered by apartheid. In 1990, Namibians came together under SWAPO (South West Africa People’s Organization). SWAPO is an organization of people who want independence, who want a voice, and who want to live in a country that values their freedom. Today, Namibia operates within a framework of a semi-presidential representative democratic republic. Namibia has a president who is both the head of state and the head of a pluriform, multi-party government.

    Namibians value development, success and growth but wonder how the UNDP will move forward with the information available to remove the deterrence of development within nations. There are many questions for this committee to answer. Even with all of the democratic failures, do authoritarian governments have a place in the global political debate? If so, do we, as countries, value our ranking of wealth and power over the happiness or wellbeing of our citizens? Once the committee formulates an opinion, Namibia wants to move forward and formulate a plan to balance both sustainable development and the desires of the people. Namibia hopes that a resolution will go beyond just educating citizens on how to be informed on their country’s political policies but that it implements programs, outreach and more to get the people involved in moving their country towards stability. In all, Namibia would like to ask how world leaders plan to address threats to national and international stability when it comes to investments.

    Answers to these questions in committee will involve recognition of the benefits and drawbacks of both authoritarianism and representative democracy. Namibia would like to see a resolution that includes counties with varying political systems in order to have a peaceful agreement and a general understanding of what needs to be done for the good of the people. In additional, it would be in the best interest of all to include undeveloped, developing, and developed countries as we search for a means to achieve stability. Furthermore, committee needs to put a solution in place that revisits countries going against human rights, who have threats against their stability and issues that deter development. Namibia would like to see Democratic nations take charge in order for the people’s voices to be heard. In summary, Namibia will feel satisfied with solutions to this conflict when resounding cultural effects regarding stability are addressed.

    Namibia is curious to hear the positions of other nations and is eager to work with others in the international community to achieve a resolution that addresses the topic at hand.

    SOURCES:
    1. UNDP. “SDG Booklet Launch.” UNDP in Namibia, http://www.na.undp.org/content/namibia/en/home/ourwork/our_stories/-sdg-booklet-launch/.
    2. “Transforming Our World: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development .:. Sustainable Development Knowledge Platform.” United Nations, United Nations, sustainabledevelopment.un.org/post2015/transformingourworld.

  • Avneetdeol
    Avneetdeol November 15, 2017 Reply

    Committee: UNDP
    Topic: Authoritarianism and Democracy
    Country: The United States of America
    Delegate: Avneet Deol

    To the last drop of ink and the last leap of innovation that oozes out of the United States of America, we will foster the principles of democracy. Although the United States’ representative democracy and free press has aged since the Fourth of July in 1776, it is nonetheless secure, dependable, and fortified. The arbitrary growth of authoritarian tendencies recently, however, is appalling. Countries are abandoning their enduring and unfading principles; they are abandoning democracy and suffering for it. The Russian Federation’s economy has stagnated due to their authoritarian tendencies. The Democratic Republic of the Congo is in limbo. President Kabila and his country are delaying elections, a pillar of democracy. Every day, displaced women in the DRC fear being assaulted or their children being abducted. The government of South Sudan is also suffering. A government, like the government of South Sudan, that assumes unlimited power and that does not respect all of its people cannot be sustained. The Nguenyyiel refugee camp in Ethiopia alone is home to over 86,000 South Sudanese refugees. Authoritarian notions restrict freedom, inhibit voices, and corrupt governments.

    The United States of America has already dedicated billions of dollars to the strengthening and development of democracy. In 2016 alone, the United States Agency for International Development used 2.4 billion dollars for democracy and governance programs. In addition, being a living, breathing example of a triumphant democracy (along with Australia, Canada, Ireland, Germany, the United Kingdom, South Korea, and more) encourages other political regimes to imitate our democracy. The USA hopes that other countries can also set examples and provide funding to support the end of the outbreak of threatening authoritarian principles. The USA hopes that the world can flourish through the support of the people it serves. As dictatorships around the world have fallen in diverse countries such as Bolivia, Bulgaria, Mongolia, and Malawi, they have attempted to transition to democracies; the United States’ government has frequently responded with our support.

    Democracy can be nurtured by giving the right skills to promising leaders and activists. Advancing into the future, the USA encourages that countries, especially those that have already adopted democratic principles, first and foremost understand and cherish the idea of popular sovereignty. The democratic power lies with the people and within communities. From there, the people can determine where portions of the power should be held. Second, decisions should be made locally – as close to communities as possible – and the aggregate decision will be solidified. The government is responsible for every person and place it serves. Thirdly, democracies should be clear and understandable in their policies. There should be clear and defined lines of accountability in every policy that is enforced. Fourth, all communities must be able to participate in decision making that affects their lives and community. Fifth, like checks and balances in the USA, every sphere of government has to support the others in order to maintain the balance of power and interdependence. Finally, the government’s primary objective is to improve opportunities and outcomes for the individuals and communities that empower it. The United States’ hopes that other countries in the UNDP will support our efforts to provide resources for countries’ endeavors to become secure, dependable, and fortified democracies.

  • Thomas-Hendricks
    Thomas-Hendricks November 15, 2017 Reply

    Committee: The United Nations Development Program
    Topic: Authoritarianism and Democracy
    Country: The Islamic Republic of Pakistan

    Originally in human civilizations, authoritarian communities were popular because it had order and decisions could be made quickly; however, as technology and human rights increased, democracy has grown. Countries in Africa, in America, in the Middle East, and in East Asia have been ruled by authoritarian regimes. All of these places have seeked, and for the most part got, liberty and have opted for democracy. Civil rights activists have become more and more popular for fighting for basic human rights around the world. This pushes countries to allow their citizens to vote in a humane, civil way.
    In 1947, India (and in turn Pakistan) declared independence from the United Kingdom. The UK was too authoritarian and ruled heavily over the people in India. Both countries have grown in democracy since. Pakistan’s president, Mamnoon Hussain, has allowed for democracy to grow because Allah wants it to. As technology and education grow in Pakistan, democracy has grown alongside too. The Islamic Republic of Pakistan believes that democracy is a good thing and that Allah has given people knowledge.
    However, we also believe that one ruler has been chosen by Allah to give people rights and to keep order over Pakistan. Numerous Southeast Asian countries believe that one ruler should allow for democracy under them to secure order. Together, our God has given us the best opportunity for the best life for our people to live. In committee, the Islamic Republic of Pakistan wants to spread Islamic Democracy. We believe that there must be someone in supreme power to make executive decisions based on the likes of Allah and to keep order over the people and democratic state he is ruling.

  • Leahpalladino
    Leahpalladino November 15, 2017 Reply

    United Nations Development Programme
    Authoritarianism and Democracy
    Republic of India
    Leah Palladino

    The battle between democracy and authoritarianism throughout the world has been extensive. Burma, for example, has been in an authoritarian state since 1962. However, its neighbors, Bangladesh and Thailand, have undergone great democratization. In many scenarios, democracy can lead to the fulfilment of the representation of the people and can provide greater economic success, such as in the United States where the people are represented by a popular vote in a presidential election. Although these aspects are greatly beneficial, democracy can sometimes lead to fragile government and result in authoritarianism. The main issue that needs to be globally addressed is the unwanted rise of authoritarianism. 3.97 billion people, especially in northern Africa and the middle east, are currently controlled by oppressive leadership. Rights of the people are stripped and citizens are repressed. As many of these countries deal with authoritarian uprisings, action becomes necessary. An example of such action is the current effort to promote democracy and human rights by the United Nations Democracy Fund, which is cofounded by India and the United States. These countries in addition to Sweden, Germany, Australia, Chile, and Poland are major donors to UNDEF. Democracies, young and old, are under more threat currently because of increased technological uses and hostile authoritarian policies threatening the democratic governments.

    India’s federal parliamentary republic protects its citizens’ fundamental rights, such as speech, religion, and expression. These rights have been ensured by enforcing the Indian Constitution of 1950. Furthermore, as a result of their democratic values, on September 14, 2005, the United Nations Democracy Fund (UNDEF) was created as a result of a partnership between India and the United States. It was formed by UN Secretary General Kofi Annan, India’s Prime Minister Dr. Singh, and US President George Bush. Currently, India is the second largest contributor to the UNDEF, having provided $31,560,000 as of 2014. This project is an extremely effective tool to promote democratic values and processes. Additionally, the UNDEF works to strengthen the voice of people, advocate for human rights, and promote the participation of all people in the processes of a democracy. Specifically in individual countries, the UNDEF builds organizations to encourage peace and governance reforms. For instance, in Iraq, women are being prepared for equal participation in governmental processes by providing them with knowledge of their rights and useful skills for use in political circumstances. Since its creation, UNDEF has funded more than 500 projects pertaining to democratization, community development, and equal rights in more than 110 countries and is still active to this day.

    To the international community, India would like to address the significance and urgency of the issue of authoritarian uprisings and propose that more countries become involved in handling the crisis. India was forced to fight in order to gain freedom and independence, and because of this history is working to help other countries grant freedom, general rights, and democratic values to their people. The United Nations can work to better promote the beneficial work of the UNDEF to countries who need it most. India’s priority in its own country is producing goods and services, therefore India wants to see greater social infrastructure in struggling countries in areas regarding education, skills, and health. As a significant donor and governing body of the UNDEF, India proposes a resolution to continue the influences of democratization in many nations. This will limit the influences of authoritarianism and improve the state of many countries by advocating for community activism, human rights, and equality.

  • avatar image
    Jake Wilcox November 15, 2017 Reply

    Submitted To: UNDP
    From: The Republic of Cuba
    Subject: Authoritarianism and Democracy

    The Republic of Cuba Recognizes the need to find political stability across the world. With governments failing across the world it is imperative that we find a solution to this that finds political stability as well as preventing the rise of oppressive regimes.
    But is democracy really the best way to keep political stability in countries? Are all democracies really the same? What defines an Authoritarian regime? Is it really fair to all governments to classify them as a democracy or an Authoritarian regime? Who classifies governments as authoritarian or democratic?
    The EIU (The Economist Intelligence Unit) defines Russia as an authoritarian state. But are they? Russia self identifies as a constitutional Republic. So are they really authoritative? Would that makes all Republics Authoritarian governments? Cuba would put forth that each country should be looked at on a individual basis due to the fact that there are many different factors that affect a country’s political stability. Their type of government can have a large affect on a country’s growth but it can also has a minimal affect on it. And are democracies really what inspires development in a country? Do authoritarian states really limit development? Cuba would argue that sanctions limit development more than government type.
    Overall Cuba believes that all governments are different and that this body must look at every situation and government on a individual basis. Once we establish a process for this we can then move forward with helping nations have more politically stable situations. The Republic of Cuba looks forward to working with the UNDP to solve these issues.

  • 21Talberev
    21Talberev November 15, 2017 Reply

    Country: Swaziland
    Committee: UNDP
    Topic: Authoritarianism and Democracy
    Delegate: Eva Talberg
    School: Williamston High School

    The most significant issue relating to the topic is the clashing between opposing governmental controlling of countries. The wide variety of government ruling spans from complete government control (absolute monarchy) and allowing the people to make decisions about how the country is ran (democracy). Authoritarianism is the oldest form of known government and has complete government dictatorship. These countries have a few excessively rich and many excessively poor. Many have millions without clean water, access to medical help, and other basic needs. The UNDP wants sustainable development, and having these very different forms of power are not allowing that goal to be achieved because of the flourishing growth of democracy and the lack of growth from conservative countries under the authoritarianism policy.

    Swaziland believes that authoritarianism government is the superior way to govern a country because the money and power should be in the hands of the people who are trained to know what to do with the money and power. If people are allowed to decide how to run the country, events could turn catastrophic, with consequences such as war, breakouts in diseases, or a national depression. People running a country may sound like the best way to govern in theory because more people would be allowed to express their views, but once people have power they begin to only use it for their personal gain, resulting in the split of countries that could potentially be united. If citizens vote without realizing the possible consequences of their actions, the government cannot stop this downhill tumble without breaking their democratic vows. While if countries decide to stick with the original method of having government control, the UN would be a more peaceful organization with strong leaders representing the citizens and allowing them to continue to work their jobs and feed their children, the leaders could lead and the people could be people and the world would run more smoothly.

    Swaziland has come to the conclusion that the most effective and efficient way to allowing the nation to be less impoverished is to require a full control of the government. Swaziland would like to mention the fact that the citizens should be allowed to pick some of the people who are normally elected in democratic countries, but should never be allowed to make direct impact on the passing of laws, military affairs, or the impeachment of any government official. In order to downsize backlash of the people, Swaziland thinks that the switch in government should be called absolute monarchy, rather than communism. An authoritarian government will keep the citizens safe, healthy, and happy.

  • avatar image
    Matt Hummel November 15, 2017 Reply

    United Nations Development Programme
    Authoritarianism and Democracy
    The Socialist Republic of Vietnam

    In the developing nations of the world, government instability, corruption, and lack of efficacy have prolonged the distress of citizens. As democracy has become the model of government used widely by developed countries, it is frequently encouraged for developing nations to promote the interests of the people. However, instability caused by weak or poorly organized democracies has caused many developing countries to turn towards authoritarian forms of government to allow for faster progress and development, which frequently create corruption and eventually stunt the growth of developing nations.
    Corrupt authoritarian regimes consistently promote corruption and stunt growth and development in young countries. Although early democratic attempts are often weak and unorganized, it is important to recognize that developing a country takes time and effort, and early attempts to create progress are likely to fail. If corruption is allowed to dominate, a developing nation’s growth will be effectively stunted until they can overcome such corruption. It is important to promote democracies and consistently weed out corruption, as was done during Vietnam’s development, to ensure the protection of the citizen’s interests and allow countries to grow to a greater potential. However, Vietnam also recognizes the danger of imposing a foreign presence during the development of early nations, as Vietnam’s history with colonialism and war left the country politically unstable for many years. It is important to the development of a young nation that foreign presences be limited, except for cases of severe corruption. In the event of an authoritarian government which shows no sign of corruption, no foreign action is necessary or beneficial.
    Vietnam urges the international community to control corruption at all levels of authoritarian and democratic government, especially in the case of developing nations. The stability and honesty of government is core to the development of liberty and quality of life among its citizens. Vietnam invites the UN to promote democracy in all nations, due to the increased growth potential and the greater risk of corruption in authoritarian systems, but warns that International involvement in a country’s politics often creates more instability than it prevents.

  • Markw0926
    Markw0926 November 15, 2017 Reply

    United Nations Development Programme
    Authoritarianism and Democracy
    Israel
    Mark Wassink

    Tyranny and authoritarianism pose a threat to political, social, and economic development. When freedom is stymied, so is economic growth. The role of the United Nations, in this scenario, is to protect against authoritarianism and tyranny. Venezuela, North Korea, and many middle eastern countries such as Palestine raise concerns about the size of government and the representation of citizens. Israel knows first hand of the results of an authoritarian government with too much power, especially from its neighboring countries that are known to be less democratic. Two key principles of building a successful nation are security of investments and rule of law. These conflicts prevent investment in the parts of israel more vulnerable to attack. If capital is under threat of being destroyed, it is unlikely people will want to invest in that area. Israel of course is far from impoverished, but can still grow. The same rule applies to other countries. An example would be when 4 trillion dollars worth of oil sat untapped under the Caspian Sea. The political situation with Georgia and Azerbaijan prevented the extraction of this oil because the risk prevented capital investment that would help extract the oil.

    This topic is deeply important to Israel, not only because of Israel’s neighboring delegations, but because it affects the health of the world, which is linked to the health of Israel. Israel has been attacked by tyrannical governments in the past. As a result, Israel has been forced to take measures that prevent against it. In Palestine’s case, their authoritarian government is preventing them from developing their nation because of the violent conflicts that start as a result. These violent conflicts end up using their resources, destroying infrastructure, and preventing investment into the nation. For years, Israel has been a stronghold of democracy surrounded by tyrannical, violent regimes. In one case, many of Israel’s neighbors tried to attack Israel at the same time, only to fail. Israel preserves its own democracy in order to set an example around the world. Israel hopes that democracy will be viable in the Middle East and aims to show how.

    Israel recognizes that attempts to remove dictators from power does not always work the way intended, often working in the opposite way. Rather, Israel would recommend taking action against the actions done by the government. Israel also recommends taking action against dictatorships that control other countries not in self-defense. Israel understands the needs of countries to protect themselves, especially from terrorist organizations such as Hamas, Hezbollah as well as violent neighbors such as Iran. The delegation of Israel the UNDP to create a solution that aims to solve the problem while minding the possible consequences.

  • Tremple
    Tremple November 15, 2017 Reply

    Around the world, the practical and moral superiority of the classical model of democracy is being questioned. Its notable successes stand now alongside its greatest failures, while authoritarian development models have created some of the world’s most prosperous societies today. It has become increasingly clear that neither model is an indicator of success or failure in development; rather, it is the situation of a country that determines a model’s applicability. Other parts of a country’ political economy, such as economic and political stability, are far stronger factors in developmental success. With this in mind, the international community has now renewed the debate on the merits of democracy.

    Russia’s system is, of course, democratic. Its leaders are elected, and its policies are thus decided by the will of the people. It fully understands the merits of a democratic system. It firmly believes that democracy is the ideal we should strive to reach. But it also recognizes that the world is not Russia – that imposing a cookie-cutter model of development that worked for one state or group of states onto another region of the world is both impractical and dangerous. The failures of the Soviet Union in exporting socialism, as well as the vain attempts of the United States at “nation-building” in the states they invaded have taught us this, but it seems that not all the world took notes on history’s lessons. The success of any model of political economy, however sound its theoretical foundations, is always determined by its situation. It is as ridiculous to ask for a completely free press in a country mired in civil war in the name of some abstract ideal of expression as it is to ask Germany to not ban the Nazi Party in the name of political diversity. These and similar proposals would all have disastrous consequences, and yet the abstract theory of democracy demands them.

    Democracy is a worthy ideal strive for. But we must recognize that our ideals are just that. They are separated from the reality. This is not the Acropolis. This is not a place for discussing philosophy. What is important in a discussion about them in a policymaking body is how the theories are actually applied in the real world. And much to the consternation of the proponents of either system, neither model wins in the empirical data. No measure of development, whether it be political stability, economic growth, or poverty reduction, suggests a better system across the globe, only better systems for different situations, which vary widely across our 193 member states. It is clear that allowing more political participation in a country is not always healthy and conducive to development, and the same is true for restricting it. Neither model is inherently superior to the other; it all depends on where one is.

    Once we move past this Cold War way of thinking, the committee’s vision can become clearer, and focus on the obstacles to development that matter. In contrast to the little to no correlation between regime type and development, political and economic stability are two of the most important factors of development. While cases of instability may occasionally partly stem from economic mismanagement, we must remember that there are some things that affect us beyond government control. Religious and political extremism, civil wars, and disease are all examples of instability caused by a source outside a government. They must be dealt with if we are to have a world that reaches its highest potential.

    At the same time, we must remember that we live in an interdependent and globalized world. Our actions affect others. The policies we pursue can often become obstacles to development beyond our borders. Attempts at coups d’etats are engines of instability, are illegally encouraged by other states unfortunately often. Such a thing has happened in Syria, ripping apart the fabric of its economy and destroying decades of developmental progress. Sanctions, such as the illegal and unwarranted measures against the Russian Federation by the United States and others are disruptive to economic stability and development as well.

    But if neither the democratic or authoritarian model is superior or universal, what is a committee centered around debating these models to do? How can we help each other overcome the universal obstacles to development without imposing a model different from what each country has? How can we work to remove the obstacles to development we ourselves have caused?

    The committee’s resolution, to answer these questions, must do three things. The first is simple and effortless: we must recognize the self-evident principle that the world is diverse and polycentric, and therefore that there is not a single superior or universal model for any class of country. The second, a necessary product of the first, is a shift in focus. We must assist each other in development, and create a way to better rid themselves of stability and other developmental stumbling blocks, rather than condemning them for having a model that does not conform to one’s own. The third is to recognize our own responsibility for instability in other countries, and to create a system for addressing developmental grievances that excludes no country.

    Of course, all of these solutions must follow the principles of international cooperation and law. They must be inclusive of all countries and development models and be based and mutual respect. Just as importantly, it must never condemn a country’s model or try to force a country to change, an approach that has time and time again proven unproductive and will undermine the international system’s credibility if used. In the past, discussions on this topic end with a praise of one system and a condemnation of the other, which accomplished nothing but animosity. It doesn’t have to be that way. Together, we can focus instead on working together towards a common development. Russia looks forward to working productively with this committee.

    • Tremple
      Tremple November 15, 2017 Reply

      Country: Russian Federation
      Committee: United Nations Development Programme
      Topic: Bypassing the Manufacturing Stage of Development
      School: Royal Oak High School
      Delegate: Collin Sharpe

  • Sbenscoter012
    Sbenscoter012 November 15, 2017 Reply

    Country: The People’s Republic of China
    Committee: UNDP
    Topic: Authoritarianism and Democracy
    Delegate: Seth Benscoter

    The People’s Republic of China recognizes the necessity of addressing the economic and political strife affecting nations such as Venezuela. The delegation also firmly believes the stagnation of major economies must be quickly addressed so as to ensure the health of the global market for years to come. In doing so, however, China emphasizes the respect that must be paid to each nation’s sovereignty, for no solution may be reached without regard to respectful diplomacy.

    It is no secret that China operates under a socialist state led by a people’s democratic dictatorship. The Communist Party of China (CPC) has guided the People’s Republic of China since its ascension into power in 1949, nurturing the post-WWII nation and implementing policies benefiting the nation as a whole. In light of these facts, China implores the UNDP to cast aside predispositions for or against democracy or authoritarian tendencies. The issue before us is one of global, not regional, importance.

    Moreover, the People’s Republic of China looks forward to working with like-minded nations and hopes solutions outside of the “authoritarian vs. democracy” arena may be investigated. To say that this body can alter the situation in Venezuela, for example, through the implication of more authoritarian or democratic provisions is fallacy. To protect nations in such situations, and to protect, too, the stagnating global market, the body could look to trade and international collaboration policies. Whether or not these aforementioned can be addressed entirely by discussion of authoritarianism and democracy is yet to be seen. Nevertheless, China hopes a joint effort may be put together among multiple nations. We look forward to hearing the perspectives of our fellow nations.

  • ClaireP
    ClaireP November 15, 2017 Reply

    United Nations Development Programme
    Authoritarianism and Democracy
    Uganda
    Claire Parish

    The United Nations has consistently focused on democracy as an ideal system of government which allows for peaceful, just, and inclusive societies. Under the UN Development Programme (UNDP) the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development includes a universally agreed goal for achieving these societies: Sustainable Development Goal 16. The UNDP has vowed to support constitutional reforms and credible elections, and ensure civil participation in governance, among other democracy focused goals. However, in recent years this key focus of the UN is being challenged by a resurgence in authoritarian regimes such as Nicolás Maduro’s in Venezuela, where he has continued to gain power despite a myriad of protests. Democratically elected individuals, perhaps elected due to recent political extremism in many countries, have begun acting in an authoritarian manner, a trend that not only goes against the fundamental beliefs of the UN but also could lead to detrimental effects in these countries due to the political and social instability that is common in authoritarian countries. Therefore, it is essential that the UN discuss the failings of the democratic process and what can be done to encourage stability and prevent the continuing rise of authoritarianism.

    After a history of authoritarian regimes in the late 1900s, Uganda is currently facing numerous challenges as we work to improve our current democracy. Under the 2016 Democracy Index, which classifies a country based on factors such as electoral processes and pluralism, the functioning of government, political participation, political culture and civil liberties, Uganda is categorized as a hybrid. Uganda’s status as a hybrid reflects significant gains in the democratic process, such as our universal suffrage for citizens over 18 and regular elections, but also shows the country has room for improvement. Uganda recognizes that, as well as allowing citizens to have a voice in the government, democracy brings peace and stability to a country; thus we have been putting into place actions to increase democratic elements in the government, and discourage any moves toward authoritarianism. Some examples of these processes include the Constitutional Review Commission, Local Council 1 and 2 elections, and electoral reform proposals. In addition, Uganda has been working to decentralize their government, bringing government closer to the people and allowing for participation in both local and national decision making. The UN is currently working with Uganda to further improve the state of democracy. Under Uganda’s National Development Plan II and based on the United Nations Development Assistance Framework as well as the 2030 Global Agenda, a multiple UN agencies in Uganda are working to consolidate rule of law, constitutional democracy, peace, and justice. The UNDP is currently acting to address hindrances to Uganda’s institutional effectiveness, for example, a currently weak demand by the people for transparency, accountability, and efficacy in the management of public affairs. With the support of the UN and Uganda’s own policies, we are projected to reach middle-income status as planned in both the national Vision 2040 and illustrated through global Agenda 2030 and its 17 Sustainable Development Goals especially goal 16 on peace, justice, and accountable institutions.

    Uganda proposes that the UN continue to support democracy in developing countries, while also moving to further encourage democratic processes in countries previously thought of as stable democracies. Uganda encourages movement towards decentralization in these democratic governments, which has the potential to de-escalate situations where partisan politics and extremism lead to a rise in authoritarianism.These strategies, which have helped shape and improve Uganda’s government, can be shifted to the myriad of countries who currently need support to maintain and refine their government. A resolution that advocates for decentralization to improve current democracies and focuses on regaining democracy in authoritarian countries is essential to create and maintain peaceful, just, and inclusive societies.

  • Nolan_Ott
    Nolan_Ott November 15, 2017 Reply

    Committee: United Nations Development Program
    Topic: Authoritarianism and Democracy
    Country: Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
    Delegate: Nolan Ott

    We, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, are a country that has a functioning monarchy. The country is ruled through an authoritarian form of government that works for our country. Previously, Saudi Arabia was ruled under an extremist islamic regime causing issues with human right. Recently, we have made a large motion to eradicate what is left of the extremists in the government. This was by removing remaining princes and ministers that were associated with and had extremist views.
    The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia acknowledges that democracy has benefits for a country, but a country is best governed through an authoritarian government. Democracy has many issues that arise with giving citizens the power to make decisions while being uninformed. By making uninformed decisions, countries are being headed by leaders who are not the best for the country’s interests. This leads to stunting economic growth in the country. Another issue that is presented in democratic style government is lack of participation by all citizens. A voter turnout of 100% is an unheard of and an unreasonable expectation for democratic governments, but it is the only way for a country to be properly represented by its population.
    To spearhead the issues presented by a democratic government, an authoritarian form of government should be used. There are issues that are associated with this kind of government can be avoided, as Saudi Arabia has shown. To prevent these issues, extremist authoritarian governments should be prevented and avoided.

  • Amanda
    Amanda November 15, 2017 Reply

    Country: Canada
    Committee: UNDP
    Topic: Developing Democratic Governments
    Delegate: Amanda Jaworsky

    In modern times around the world, countries are increasingly switching to a form of democracy as their governance system. This, as a general rule, is a beneficial shift as it means that people’s voices are heard and the hardships and struggles of an entire country are not placed into a single person’s hands. However, when this switch is not done in an organized and deliberate manner it is very easy for it to plunge a country into chaos and lead to authoritarian styles of government. As almost all established first world countries share the democratic system of government, it is their job to usher in an organized and safe shift of power in non-democratic countries wishing to follow the trend of safer and more secure power. Country cooperation is the only way the world can make this shift towards democracy.
    The country of Canada is a full-fledged democracy, and has been since 1867. Canada was first created with two levels of government, a federal and provincial level, and central parliament with three parts: the monarch, the senate, and the house of commons. In this day and age it has shifted to include three parts- a municipal, provincial, and federal level, and the place of the monarch is a mere figurehead, with most power going to the prime minister. This form of government has served Canada well, and Canada is in great support of the wide shift towards this form of government. Canada also believes that it is in the hands of developed countries to foster this shift, and that it should be supported and helped by other countries.
    In order to stop the incidental shift of countries to authoritarianism, Canada has worked with the EU to provide direct support, legal and administrative training, and technical assistance. One thing that Canada believes will be the most beneficial to stopping this turn to authoritarianism is election observations. These would allow countries to practice key democratic practices but also ensure that they are carried out correctly and not tampered with. Canada also suggests that we include teaching of both citizens and possible officials to make sure there is a thorough understanding of democracy among both the people and the newly-formed government. Using peacekeeping troops or some sort of safety coalition and having the help of well-established countries while the switch is being made are also positive strategies that Canada believes could make the transition to democracy swifter, easier, and safer.

  • Kylekorte
    Kylekorte November 15, 2017 Reply

    United National Development Programme
    Authoritarianism and Democracy
    Plurinational State of Bolivia
    Kyle Korte

    Democracy is universally recognized as one of the core ideals of the United Nations, and, according to the Democracy Papers, has become a prevalent governmental system, outnumbering autocracies by 80 countries, and anocracies by 50. The UN advocated for it through the Sustainable Development Goal 16; this goal promotes rule of law and the people’s access to justice, security, and human rights. While electoral democracy has proven to progress some nations’ economies and facilitate for sociopolitical success, elected officials may give rise to authoritarian regimes that repress a nation’s citizens, a succession of events that been observed in many situations. This new surge in authoritarian regimes completely defies the democratic ideals and values held by the UNDP in numerous ways. All of these consequences not only affect the nation, but also the national community, therefore it is imperative that the United Nations addresses this influx of authoritarian governments and fight the corruption presented by these regimes.

    With an unstable democratic past, Bolivia has experienced many of these indicators of authoritarianism, but has overcome them in the current Morales administration with the help of United Nations Democratic Fund. Bolivia’s status as a hybrid government in the 2016 Democracy Index, a company that indexes countries based on electoral processes and pluralism, civil liberties, functioning of government, and political participation, demonstrates our democratic growth. President Morales is a progressive Bolivian leader through creating a new constitution that gave equal rights to the indigenous people that make up 60% of the population, including Morales. The UN has provided us with constitutional support for years, and they guided us in the creation of our new Constitution through their Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues. Through the Institutional Strategic Plan for the period 2013-2017, we strive to create an inclusive, participatory, and transparent democracy that allow for us to represent the best interests of our people. Transparency will achieve public accountability and fight corruption in the government. In addition, we believe that continuity of government authority is the key to national development, however, we create plans and programs that will progress Bolivia under any administration. Ultimately, we recognize the views of the people, meaning that we will do everything in our power to meet their needs and wants.

    Bolivia proposes that the UN should secure existing democracies through promoting transparency, a crucial aspect in democracy. The people need to be properly informed in order to be able choose leadership with full knowledge; to give the people this information, the government must establish transparency. We recommend for the UN to facilitate for governmental transparency through promoting governments to allow for their citizens to access information and encouraging individual participation in democratic processes.

  • Taylorpotter
    Taylorpotter November 15, 2017 Reply

    United Nations Development Programme
    Authoritarianism and Democracy
    The Republic of Honduras
    Taylor Potter

    The rise of authoritarianism is detrimental to the development of many nations. This is an important topic to both developed and underdeveloped countries. Authoritarian policies can be seen in Democracies, and if they continue the effect will be seen in the economic health of all nations. Authoritarianism restricts the personal freedoms of the citizens. According to Human Rights Foundation’s research, the citizens of 94 countries suffer under non-democratic regimes. In total 3.97 billion people are being controlled by tyrants. The United Nations needs to address the civil rights violations and crime that has arose from authoritarian government presence. Authoritarian government violates the rights and oppress the citizens. As well as letting social and economic injustices flourish.

    As a country who has recently shifted from Authoritarian rule into Democracy, Honduras understands how military dictatorships can negatively impact the citizens and economy. We have come a long way since military dictatorships, but are still trying to obtain a perfect democracy. Honduras has faced corruption as a result of authoritarian rule, and agree the UN should help these nations stop the spreading of authoritarianism. Honduras has been apart of many treaties that focus on ending corruption and promoting democracy including United Nations Convention against Corruption (UNCAC), and Inter-American Convention Against Corruption (IACAC). There has been many efforts to try and address these problems each with little success. Authoritarianism is not the direction failing democracies should head towards. Instead of taking away the rights and liberties of the people the UN should be working with these countries to solve the problems at the root. These problems include corruption, crime, as well as political and economic instability. The UN needs to promote democracy in the areas. They can do this by sending peacekeepers, providing electoral assistance, and offering solutions to the factors that deter stability in democracy.

    Honduras proposes that the United Nations help provide peacekeepers to the countries with corrupt governments to prevent the rise of authoritarianism. As well as organizing elections in countries facing political chaos. Honduras knows what effects authoritarian governments can have on the economy and individuals rights. In order to prevent this, the UN can step in to failing democracies and provide aid and resources. This would Result in the discontinuation of authoritarian tendencies. For the United Nations Development Programme to achieve its goal of Sustainable Development there needs to be freedoms and rule of law. A resolution that advocates for helping politically corrupt nations will help to end the spread of authoritarianism.

  • Ryansneider
    Ryansneider November 15, 2017 Reply

    Committee: UNDP
    Country: Algeria
    Topic: Authoritarianism and Democracy
    Delegate: Ryan Sneider

    In the past 3 centuries, the rise of nationalism and the decline of empires has brought about a new surge in democracy. The right of citizen rule has been increasingly sought after by peoples as they break their colonial ties. Growing economies and technology has started globalization and has increased this push for democratization in authoritarian states. It was heightened further with the creation of the League of Nations and later the United Nations. The U.N. has many principles of democracy and Freedom in their Charter. Authoritarianism often leads to developmental stagnation. Although democracy gives more individual freedom, it sacrifices political stability. An example of this would be the situation in Yemen, in which protesters eventually were able to make the dictator step down, and a new leader was installed. The leader did not have any control over the country though, and a civil war broke out due to this. In many cases, in the past decades, authoritarianism has increased to to failed attempts at democracy.
    Algeria has had a long history with our struggle of Authoritarianism and Democracy. When we were a colony of France, our political freedom as Algerians was little to none. After our Revolution, where we gained independence and became our own state, we were finally able to to self rule after being dominated by foreign powers for so long. We had struggled, as many newly created nations do, to create a government that worked the best it could. Through the years, there was political dissident, as political parties and radicals crashed against each other. The Algerian government had to put an end to this political fighting, eventually banning political parties based on religion in the early 1990’s. With constant criticism from the public, we had to set a rule prohibiting general assembly without permission. We also believe that homosexuality is not deserving of rights, as it goes against Islam.
    To address this issue, Algeria believes that human rights should be encouraged by the the United Nations, but we also that nations should not be forced to accept the rights proposed. We believe that pushes by external groups, and often western countries, to adhere to their moral values and opinions on human rights is wrong. We have made many strides in the promotion of rights in Algeria, especially after our independence from France. We accept these rights issued by the UN charter, but do not want them to be forced upon us.

  • 21Talberev
    21Talberev November 15, 2017 Reply

    Country: Swaziland
    Committee: UNDP
    Topic: Bypassing the Manufacturing Stage of Development
    Delegate: EvaTalberg

    The most significant problem relating to the topic is that manufacturers are feeling pressure and being allowed to increase the speed and customer engagement. Manufacturers are building to suit individual orders rather than to stock their product. In this environment, intermediaries that create value by holding inventory are becoming less and less necessary. High tech manufacturers are also outsourcing their products to third party. These companies are hoping to avoid risks of investing in expensive manufacturing plants and losing sight of what they see as their true source of advantage – product research and development. Companies are bypassing the stop at warehouses for product development to cut the costs of shipping and satisfy their customers by allowing to give them their products sooner. Companies including sellers of food and drugs, are making great products but rushing through the trial and development stage of the process in order to get to their release faster.

    Swaziland would like to mention the fact that the main food most of the population consumes is grown by themselves and their families, so this problem does not directly impact most of Swaziland’s citizens. Although Swaziland exports canned fruit and flavoring for soft drinks, these products are not impacted by this problem because of their lack of complex manufacturing. Swaziland also exports raw sugar cane and citrus. As a member of the SACU, Swaziland´s main local trading partner is South Africa, and main world wide trading partners are the United States of America and the European Union.

    Swaziland believes that the best solution to the problem would be to require a certain amount of either time or amount of tests for new drugs that are being sold in pharmacys unless their is a severe breakout of a highly contagious disease. Technology should also be only sold by first party manufacturers rather than third party, cheaper, manufacturing companies, especially when potential defect or issue with a product could harm lives of the consumers.
    Another reason to require a given amount of test time could be to press down on the amount of recalls companies have to give to their buyers. Recalls are annoying for the consumers, and expensive to the companies selling the product.

  • Lexieleona
    Lexieleona November 15, 2017 Reply

    UNDP
    Authoritarianism and Democracy
    Republic of Chile
    Alexis Jones

    Chile had once been suppressed by modern-day authoritarianism under military rule into 1990, but under military government, they were able to have a successful economic revolution because their implementation did not duplicate in the political arena. Though isolated politically, Chile was acknowledged for their economic reforms under military regime that changed their economy into one of the most open economic systems in the developing world. Resilience from the Chilean people caused the fall of the authoritarian wave, under the deep-rooted democratic practices and institutions that amplified the national character of Chile. The displacement of the authoritarian leader in 1990 caused a difficult transition back into democracy. The framework of institutional order under authoritarian regime had to be substantially modified by Chilean civilian elites, if they ever wanted to return to full democracy. Chile had been able to surpass its authoritarian stage because government opponents across the spectrum have proven themselves capable of uniting for a common purpose and have resisted radical behavior that might jeopardize the return to civilian control. Also, the armed forces have remained highly disciplined, professional and uncorrupted despite unprecedented proximity to power. Now, Chile stands as one of the leading Latin American democracies.
    Countries that are currently being imposed by authoritarian control are likely involuntarily ruled under their vulnerable economy. Whether they have weak public institutions, denial of basic human rights, high susceptibility to violence, forced displacement, or chronic poverty, the people under authoritarian regimes are not represented in their best favor. Modern dictatorships seek the consent of the governed people by invoking a sense of hope towards a “brighter future”, they gain power by violating the constitution implemented in their state, because it was once “unacceptable”. Whether the country is in need of new economic reform should be in the hands of the country as a whole, not blinded by the hand of one person who empowers them all. However, there could be plenty of competent and efficient dictators, that really do want to reform the economy for the best, the issue is that the governed people do not have individual or political freedom. Whether a country decides to implicate authoritarian control should be in consideration of the people’s rights, the best means of government has historically and presently proved to be democracy, but for countries that do not have strong institutions and such, a stronger force could be needed, but should it really be in the hands of a single person? Democracy is not perfect either, though
    it upholds basic human rights and community. The goal of the UNDP in this issue should be to protect the rights of the governed people, while maintaining a government supplemental to their economic stance and vulnerability, even if Authoritarianism is necessary for certain countries.

  • JPPalacios
    JPPalacios November 15, 2017 Reply

    Democracy is not a new concept. It’s an essential component of social groups and helps determine the outcome of an organized society. As civilization became more sophisticated, different systems of government developed according to their situation. The relatively recent formation of the nation-state has also fostered a new age of security as countries engage in the practice of distribution of power. Diplomacy has proven to be much more prominent throughout the world and through which we cooperate and negotiate agreements and disagreements alike. However, there are those who still continue to live under the rule of tyranny. Around ninety-four countries have a government that is authoritarian in nature. The Kingdom of Sweden recognizes that the exclusion of participants in the process of governance completely ignores the fundamental rights that every single human is born with.
    In eastern Europe, governments have increasingly become hostile towards the European community while also choosing to isolate themselves from the rest of the world. Authoritarian governments are responsible for much strife throughout the world. The citizens of those countries experience a wide variety of disadvantages stemming from a lack of resources and suppression of individual expression. The UNDP must not tolerate any aggressor and call out those who compromise the lives of other human beings for self-interest. The Kingdom of Sweden will continue to advocate for those are without a voice. If the international community fails to address the growing threat of authoritarianism, the future of democracy is in peril.
    The UNDP must assure that The Universal Declaration of Human Rights is protected above all else. The Kingdom of Sweden fully supports the right of their citizens to understand their constitution. “If a state is to function effectively, its citizens need to agree on the rules of the game. If these are observed, decisions are perceived to be legitimate. The rule of law is a precondition for legal security and the durability of the form of government” (Constitution of Sweden). The system of democracy of the Kingdom of Sweden is enshrined in its constitution. It is broken up into four fundamental laws: the instrument of government, the act of succession, the freedom of press act and the fundamental law on freedom of expression. In addition to these laws, the country abides by the EU acquis communautaire.
    Developing nations in turmoil-albeit because of economic, sociopolitical or religious strife- must have democratic solutions; this reaffirms our commitment towards a better future. The Kingdom of Sweden stands by the principles of cordial cooperation to revive the spirit of democracy and will continue its fight against the threat of authoritarian governments to secure global development and security. Attempts at a resolution to the issue will require special consideration to the following points: democracy building, preserving freedom of expression, abolishing capital punishment, combat torture and executions, protection of the rule of law human rights, and fighting discrimination.

  • Luand9
    Luand9 November 15, 2017 Reply

    Committee: UNDP
    Topic: Authoritarianism and Democracy
    Country: Australia
    Andrew Lu
    Throughout history, the system of government used by a nation has been ever-changing. From
    monarchies, oligarchies, democracies, dictatorships, and more, the options for a system of
    government are numerous. However, in the world today, democracy has appeared as the most
    popular choice for a system of government. Starting in the Greek Empire in the 507 B.C, a
    system of government was proposed that allowed the people to make decisions. Since than,
    democracy has evolved into many different forms such as representative democracy, where the
    people choose an individual to speak for them. However, not all countries has adopted this
    system of government, with countries such as North Korea, Syria, Chad, Saudi Arabia, and
    many more. The choice of government greatly impacts the citizens of that country. With
    Authoritarianism governments, citizens are left to the control of the government which may lead
    to corruption and loss of rights for individuals. However, Democratic governments may lead to
    unstable governments which cause a power vacuum often giving rise to Authoritarianism
    government. With the increase of Authoritarianism governments resulting from the failing
    attempts at democracy, it is up to the UNDP to address how to proceed forward in the situation.
    Australia modeled their constitution from the United States following their federation in 1901.
    This constitution was drafted through the input and consensus of people from all colonies. This
    constitution can not be amended unless the citizens vote to change it. Australia supports
    democracy, being one of the countries joining the League of Nations after WW1 in 1920.
    Additionally in 1951, Australia along with New Zealand and the United States sign the ANZUS
    treaty, a defense security pact for the Pacific area. It offered Australia and New Zealand
    protection against a possible threat of Soviet or Chinese aggression and the United States gains
    support against communism in the Pacific region. Australia supports nations who wish to adopt
    democratic governments and support oppositions against authoritarian governments.
    Australia recommends all countries adopting or modifying their form of government into a
    democracy that models Australia’s current political system. The power of government is
    separated into three branches the legislative, executive, and judicial. Each branch having their
    own tasks and able to limit the power of one another. These checks and balances allows a
    controlled and balanced form of government and prevents corruption and absolute power
    contrast to an Authoritarianism government. The members of the executive branch are chosen
    from and by the legislative branch. However, the power is kept balanced as Ministers are
    subject to the scrutiny of other Members of the Parliament led by an officially recognized
    opposition. This keeps the executive branch from abusing power as the members may be voted
    out at any time in their term. This system of democratic government allows a balanced and
    controlled form of power to guarantee the citizens protection from corruption. Australia wishes to
    see other countries who wish to adopt a democratic government be supported by countries in
    the United Nations and recommends they adopt the Australian democratic government system.

  • JPPalacios
    JPPalacios November 15, 2017 Reply

    Committee: United Nations Development Program
    Topic: Authoritarianism and Democracy
    Country: The Kingdom of Sweden
    Delegate: Juan Paulo Palacios

  • avatar image
    Kilian Guensche November 15, 2017 Reply

    Committee: Development Programme
    Topic: Authoritarianism and Democracy
    Country: Czech Republic
    Delegate: Kilian Guensche

    With the failures of democracies worldwide coming to light in recent years, questions surrounding democracy’s efficacy have become much more mainstream. Bearing in mind the stability and expediency that accompanies most authoritarian governments, one may contemplate very seriously whether or not authoritarianism can serve as a viable alternative to democracy.

    The Czech Republic has grown painfully familiar with authoritarianism throughout its history as a nation-state. After a long period of subjugation and oppression by Austrians, Germans, and communist strongmen such as Klement Gottwald and Antonín Novotný, the Czech Republic had only broken the bonds of authoritarianism in 1989. Since then, the Czech Republic boasts one of the most fragmented governments in Europe with representation shared between 9 ideologically unique political parties. Since the fall of the communist regime in the 1989 Velvet Revolution, the Czech people have assumed greater freedoms with respect to the press and personal expression. This social liberalization has led the Czech Republic to its place as the 27th happiest nation in the world. The economic liberalization following the Velvet Revolution has likewise ushered in explosive economic growth in the Czech Republic, characterized by exceptionally low unemployment (2.7%) and high growth rate (4.7%). The Czech Republic, therefore, supports the notion that although democracy has flaws as a form of government, it is without a doubt the best form of government for a nation seeking to develop both socially and economically.

    In true democratic fashion, the Czech government has done nothing to eliminate the election prospects of autocrats both globally and within the Republic itself. There are no laws dictating which ideas can or cannot be expressed by the Czech people or the representatives they elect to office. As a result, Andrej Babis, a controversial Czech billionaire and politician has been overwhelmingly elected to be the prime minister of the next Czech government on a pro-Russian, islamophobic platform aimed at “make[ing] the Czech Republic excellent again”. With such a dramatic move away from long-standing political norms in so many countries including the Czech Republic, it’s easy to question the interests of the citizens and ask whether or not they truly know what’s best for them.

    The Czech Republic believes that between democracy and authoritarianism, democracy is objectively the superior form of government in the interest of economic and social development. As demonstrated within the Czech Republic’s borders, a strong democracy that reflects the will of the people carries with it a strong economy characterized by low unemployment and an astronomically high growth rate. And even if such an open democracy invites in demagogues, the positive effects that democracy passively has on a nation’s economic development far outweighs the adverse effects of a single demagogue’s term in office. The Czech republic will therefore support any measure to encourage the spread and strengthening of democracies across the world in the pursuit of a freer, happier world.

  • Simsandhu9
    Simsandhu9 November 15, 2017 Reply

    Country: Argentina
    Committee: UNDP
    Topic: Bypassing the Manufacturing Stage of Development
    Delegate: Harsimran Sandhu
    Many countries in Latin America and Africa suffer under an authoritarian regime. We, Argentina, are one of the few countries in these regions that has experienced a major political change. While authoritarian regimes might promote economic growth and stability, however, it can lead to lives being lost and human rights being violated. Not only this, but authoritarian governments can lead to large amounts of corruption as more power is allocated to one person. Such corruption halts any economic growth and government stability that might be acquired from an authoritarian regime. Democracies, on the other hand, offer power to the citizens. Democracies usually have lower amounts of corruption with human rights being put at the center of attention. However, democracies are faced with their own issues from inability to make decisive decisions and the possibility of electing a corrupt politicians.
    We, Argentina, have a representative democracy, where the people can elect the presidents with popular vote. From this, the president has the power to assign its own cabinet and make executive decisions. However, we have a congress, independent from the executive branch(president), to help keep the president in check. Argentina invites many Authoritarian and Democratic countries to support a representative democracy to have the best of both worlds. In terms of an economic crisis the president elected by the people can take charge and lead the people and the country out of an economic crisis. If the president steps out of bounds the congress can come in and help restrict the president from stepping too far from its position.
    In short, Argentina recognizes the issues of both the Authoritarian and Democratic government systems bring to countries and while it may be beneficial in the short run, these types of government are not strong in promoting economic sustainability. We urge the United Nations to give many countries the choice and help spread the idea to adopt a representative democracy.

  • Haileyjansen
    Haileyjansen November 15, 2017 Reply

    Committee: United Nations Development Programme
    Topic: Authoritarianism and Democracy
    Country: France

    Throughout the past centuries, democracy has been on the rise throughout the world as the most popular form of governing because people have seen the effects of democracy in countries such as the United States. Although the lengths of democracy stretch to many countries around the world, authoritarianism is still being practiced in many places disrupting the lives of citizens by denying their freedom.
    Countries currently facing the misfortune of an authoritarianism style of government include Poland, Venezuela, and the Philippines. They are facing several types of issues ranging from drug and gang violence endorsed by the government and corruption in the political office. Countries that practice authoritarianism depend upon the strict and forceful impact of the government to enforce, or not enforce, the laws the government claims to uphold. The goal of these countries practicing authoritarianism is to keep their citizens in check and maintain their power at all costs.
    The current style of government in place in France is a semi presidential republic. The people have a voice in the government through the representatives they elect. This system assures that the citizens will always have an input on the policies and laws that are put into place by the French prime minister. France recognizes the obvious struggle of the individuals living under an authoritarianism style of government and supports the growth of democracy to these affected countries. In the past, France has shown our stance by invading other countries and attempting to establish a new government with French input. This tactic has not proven to be very successful, thus France does not plan to use this strategy in the near future to spread democracy to countries such as Venezuela, Poland, and the Philippines.

  • Moonjos
    Moonjos November 15, 2017 Reply

    Country: Italy
    Committee: UNDP
    Topic: Authoritarianism and Democracy
    Delegate: Joey Mooney
    Throughout the world, many developing countries have taken up democracy as their governing system. This system has proven to be beneficial to many powers of the world today. The voice of the entire country is prevalent in the officials that are elected to their chosen seats. While this form of government is prevalent in the world today, authoritarianism has been lurking in the shadows of democracies for many years. While authoritarianism usually comes with some negative connotation, it has proven to be somewhat beneficial to the success of a country, but at the expense of the rights of the people. We believe that authoritarianism is unjust and unfair to the people who elected the officials that had gained their trust.
    Ever since 1946 Italy has been a democratic republican government after abolishing their old form of a monarchy. While the nation has been considered as a democracy, the term authoritarian came into the spectrum only two years ago. This accusation was because of the pushes for reforms that Prime Minister Matteo Renzi had made. These pushes called to subject whether he was just replacing his old greedy politicians with the same form of greedy, government. This, however, was not the case, and the Prime Minister was just making the changes necessary to set our country back on the right track.
    Italy has always had a strong view on how democracy is the best form of government possible for a nation to thrive. We have always believed that the voice of the nation should be heard through selected individuals and that adapting an authoritarian nature would undermine our beliefs in how our country should be run.

  • Charliej1221
    Charliej1221 November 15, 2017 Reply

    Committee: UNDP
    Country: Laos
    Topic: Authoritarianism and Democracy
    Delegate: Charlotte Howald
    School: Saginaw Arts and Sciences Academy

    The UN strives for an internationally uniform sense of order and organization in order to benefit the general populous by eliminating chaos and miscommunications. The country of Laos is an exemplary example of precision and management.

    In the citizens’ best interests, the government remains true to one legal party; Phak Pasason Pativat Lao (Lao People’s Revolutionary Party – LPRP). In the constitution of the country of Laos – which was ratified in August 1991 – Article 3 declares that the LPRP is the predominate assembly in government, which gives it the greatest level of power in the institution of government. Said government takes steps to benefit its citizens through representation of all strata. The system works to understand how to make the most effective choices in order to promise success for the future and the country as a whole and to manage other organizations while guiding to complete prosperity. Within the LPRP are educated and compassionate members whose dedication allows them to make the country of Laos a safer and more efficiently-organized place for its citizens. The country of Laos remains stable due to knowledgeable and noble-minded individuals who forge sophisticated decisions on behalf of the people.

    Under precise, well-coordinated rule, the country of Laos has become more organized, by improving practices to work faster within the government to eliminate wasted time by waiting for an overall opinion of each individual. With stability in government and ruling figures, the country of Laos would like to encourage other nations of the world to view Laos as an example of perfect rule. The country of Laos very much looks forward to working with other delegates of the world in hopes of creating strong solutions leading the members of the UN to a superior state of being.

  • Milam
    Milam November 15, 2017 Reply

    Country: Germany
    Committee: United Nations Development Programme
    Topic: Authoritarianism and Democracy
    Delegate: Jacob Milam
    School: Williamston High School

    There has long since been a debate as to whether or not democracy truly leads to economic and social prosperity. In this endeavor nations have shown a tendency to push forth their own political ideals unto others in the name of freedom and human rights for all. At times it has been through the use of diplomatic and economic ties which nations have utilized to place a political system considered to be right and just, other times, through a show of force. Western attempts to end a regime of an authoritarian government have ended both in peace and in war. Out of bloodsoaked revolutions against authoritarian powers have arisen both prospering governments and war torn nations.

    The history of Germany is that of many forms of government; from power hungry dictators and corrupt government regimes, to social reformist democracies and republics. Germany has witnessed it all and through it all there has been no perfect government and perhaps there never will be. However, the people of Germany have come to know that there are certain principles which have stood true in the well being of the society. Affording all groups equal representation and justice; freedom of expression and learning to promote innovation; rule of law to foster predictability for investors and stop corruption from stunting growth; and the protection of human rights.

    Time and time again humanity has failed to learn from our past, dooming us to a endless cycle of repetition. Let us now heed the warning of past generations who have learned that the spread of ideals is best demonstrated through peace and unity rather than war and division. The era of force is over; and the time of understanding is at the door. It is the duty of this committee to promote abd embody the idea of an international community where political ideas can be shared and emphasized so that we do not push against one another, creating a fear of political ideals that may be foreign to a nation. In a time where the citizens of nations know history of their people and see the many possibilities of what a government can be, when a new form of government is forced onto a nation and it’s people it is not done so with hope but with fear. To promote force is to promote fear. To promote a world where we may share our political ideals, is to promote a world of understanding and peace.

  • Yang099
    Yang099 November 15, 2017 Reply

    The fall of democracy and uprising of Authoritarianism are ongoing worldwidely. Peru believes that this trend will not end shortly and,it is a time to seriously consider these two different government forms. Even though we respect other country’s decision, as a democratic nation, we suggest other nations to select democracy, which has been historically proven to provide a better opportunity to nation and its people.

    Peru was also once under military regimes for approximately 12 years. Even though there was a struggle, Peru succeeded to establish democratic government by the 1993 constitution of Peru. Since then, Peru put great effort to maintain our political stability, following the past successful models such as United States. Peru now is experiencing unprecedented political stability and economic growth.
    Even though Authoritarianism can be a good form for quick decision, it can eventually create a problem on the right of citizens.

    Peru understands that each nation has a right to choose its own government form; however, we believe the power of democracy outweighs that of authoritarianism. We will take a position which encourages other nations to follow the path of democracy. We believe Peru and other democratic countries in UN should strongly suggest nations to follow the same path as we did. We hope countries seriously consider which form of government can ultimately benefit the nation and its people.

    • Yang099
      Yang099 November 15, 2017 Reply

      Committee : Developmental Programme
      Topic : Authoritarianism and Democracy
      Country : Peru

  • Moisguer18
    Moisguer18 November 15, 2017 Reply

    Moise Guerrier
    Nov 9, 2017
    Model UN

    Country: Azerbaijan
    Country leader: Ilham Aliyev
    Topic: Authoritarianism and Democracy

    Here in Azerbaijan we are a Democracy and we believe that everyone has rights and they should those right under a safe and protected nation. With that being said there no such thing as a perfect country like other countries we do things a little different around here. In order to be a president in Azerbaijan you had have lived in the country for 10 years and be 35 or older, the presidency is 5-7 years. With you get to pick your own vice president and your own conidial numbers with you own house members.

    Like every country we have our own issues as well one of this in the media that is one of our biggest problem the media is restricted to what they can put out there and we’ve been work on it but do do that when taken to court our judge have been none to give hursh sentence such frozen media bank accounts. Next step in our country is to put plans in place to stop this from happening and we want to get to the bottom of this and to make the people feel like the have there full lage freedom. And that will start with give media more freedom to exercise the right to press as they feel fit

    And that will take place in parliament and in our constitution. In Azerbaijan we are inching towards a new future and it is up to us to make that future shine and as bright then the north star.

  • Claireverb
    Claireverb November 15, 2017 Reply

    United Nations Development Programme
    Authoritarianism and Democracy
    Afghanistan
    Claire Verbrugge

    Young democracies, while promising people opportunity and participation in government, are currently threatened by a rise in authoritarianism. This is because of countries have been threatening young and old democracies with hostile authoritarian policies. Citizens in these countries are striving for the right of choice, transparency, participation, and respect in their governing institutions. The United Nations Development Programme’s (UNDP’s) goal to strengthen these core human values is evidenced by their commitment to help more than 130 countries and devote $1.5 billion in resources to assist and create democratic governance. The need for these contributions is due to the increase of civil engagements caused by uprisings from all social strata. Despite drastic cultural and political changes brought about by the Taliban in the mid-1990s and the ensuing years of instability and war, Afghanistan’s fledgling democracy continues to fight for a well-established government. A monumental step in the right direction occurred in 2014 when Ashraf Ghani was elected president and peacefully transitioned into power. Although positive strides have taken place in creating a participatory government, countries with young democracies need resources and support to solidify a representative government.

    As a country that has faced many cultural and political upheavals, Afghanistan’s leadership understands the importance of strengthening democratic core values and institutions at all levels of society. Afghanistan has fought to maintain a secure democracy by adopting a new constitution and working with various international organizations. With assistance from the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), Afghanistan enhanced their three branches of government and constructed election processes that allow citizens to vote directly for their representatives. In addition, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) is committed to helping grow an independent government in Afghanistan. Also, the UNDP has provided tremendous support in the reconstruction process and Sustainable Development Goals (SDG), one of the many projects, helps bring quality education to children in Afghanistan and many other countries. These efforts will help decrease the rise of authoritarianism.

    Afghanistan proposes that the United Nations provide resources to improve literacy and overall education which will, in turn, create a stronger foundation of democracy and improve the voting process. Afghanistan also proposes that the United Nations send additional institutional support to preventing elitists from corrupting its system. Enforcing laws and promoting a democracy for the people would help stop corruption. Afghanistan has made reparations such as improving their constitution from the times of the Taliban rule and continues to strive for a fair democracy, but with obstacles in the way such as lack of education and rich elitists threatening the government’s power, it is not hard to see why Afghanistan and many other countries are stuck with an unstable government system. With just thirty-eight percent of the population able to read, it makes the foundation of democracy and political education weak. One way to help solve this issue would be to create more infrastructure because the country is lacking resources. A resolution that improves both the integrity of the institutions and increases the education of people will strengthen a government’s democratic core values and reduce the rise of authoritarianism.

  • Neils-M
    Neils-M November 15, 2017 Reply

    The Kingdom of Belgium has a long-standing opposition to authoritarianism of any form, believing that it is the duty of free and prosperous peoples to support the development and continuation of stable democracies around the world. As a result, the rise of authoritarianism in both developed and developing countries over the past decades is incredibly troubling, and should be seen as a threat to the stability of the modern world. While the scope of the troubling rise of restrictive governments and the failure of democracy in young nation-states is often underplayed and unappreciated by the residents of more stable nations, a study by the Human Rights Foundation found that 3.97 billion citizens of 94 countries- over half of the world’s population- suffer under non-democratic regimes. The recent rise of authoritarianism has come in two main forms, the restriction of freedoms within developed economies, and the failure of democracy in the developing world. Russia and China, both world economic leaders, not only actively trade with and support many authoritarian states, but also have implemented worrying restrictions on individual freedoms within their countries, notably freedom of speech and press. The constitutional crisis in Poland and recent electoral trends in France, England, the United States, and many other democratic Western nations have provided further evidence that the developed world is by no means immune to the trend of authoritarianism. Beyond this, the citizens of the developing world are plagued by oppression and human rights violations by a plethora of tyrants, absolute monarchs, military juntas, and authoritarians. The recent atrocities in Myanmar and the longtime repression within authoritarian states across Asia, the Middle East, and Africa are clear examples of the harms of authoritarian governments. Dictator-led nations are significantly more likely to be guilty of human rights violations and have lower levels of both mental and physical health, poorer levels of education, and fewer original patents than democratic nations, evidence of the negative effects of such governments.

    This being said, the Kingdom of Belgium recognizes the need for civil discussion and the historical dangers of over-involvement in developing nations. The most effective tactic in combating the rise of authoritarianism is two-fold. Firstly, the developed world must lead by example, promoting human rights as well as freedom of press and opposition within their own nations. Secondly, the stance of the United Nations should be one of cooperation with and support for the development of stable, democratic states. The Kingdom of Belgium is already a member of the European Partnership for Democracy, an organization devoted to encouraging the creation and continuation of free states in the developing world. The United Nations Development Program can contribute to the fight against the rise of authoritarianism in a number of ways, most importantly through the condemnation of restriction of freedom of press and opposition within both developed and developing nations, creation of a United Nations Special Committee on Authoritarianism to investigate and discuss the issues and disparities associated with non-democratic governments, official support for free media outlets within authoritarian states, and efforts to restrict economic support for restrictive states guilty of human rights violations.

  • avatar image
    Maddie Meyer November 15, 2017 Reply

    Committee: United Nations Development Program
    Topic: Authoritarianism and Democracy
    Country: Brazil
    Delegate: Maddie Meyer

    As a developing nation, Brazil has only had a democratic government since 1990. Even with the establishment of a democracy, we have had multiple issues of corruption while different leaders have been in power. Due to this, we have seen the negative effects of authoritarianism in democracies first-hand, and we hope to be able to help other nations avoid the same issues we have encountered in the past.

    We have dealt with economic corruption and illegal actions regarding budget laws during by our past presidents in our short 20 years of democracy, and we believe one of the only ways to help combat these issues is to internally strengthen systems of checks and balances within the nations. However, Brazil opposes direct foreign intervention into the politics of other nations, and would ultimately like to see solutions that do not harm the citizens of these nations. Political leaders are solely responsible for corruption, and they must be held accountable without harming the citizens. This is why Brazil does not believe sanctions are the answer to this problem because it would not like to see the government of developing nations, such as itself, harmed by the unlawful actions of their leaders.

  • avatar image
    Alex Shier November 15, 2017 Reply

    Committee: United Nations Development Program
    Topic: Authoritarianism and Democracy
    Country: Republic of Korea

    As the world continues to emerge from the Cold War, the very aspects of ideological conflict that shaped the standoff are still occurring today. Authoritarianism and democracy clash in hotspots like the Middle East and Sub Saharan Africa. Authoritarianism threatens South Korea every day. This threat, specifically from the DPRK, affects every South Korean’s lifestyle and greatly influences our foreign policy. The DPRK has threatened The Republic of Korea with destruction many times, and in our opinion, is the reason for why authoritarianism must be addressed. Though we will recognize not all regimes are like the DPRK, and many are peaceful, but the ones who are not are more trouble than they are worth.
    Democracies worldwide are currently combating the superficial appeals of dictatorships. Authoritarian regimes undoubtedly provide initial stability and security, but they are not a long-term solution and always end in the exploitation of the ruled people. The Republic of Korea wishes to reverse the decline of the world’s democracies and stem the rising tide of extreme nationalism. We are implementing this policy through passing UN Security Council Resolutions 2118, and 2144, calling for the limitation of the Syrian regime’s power through the destruction of their chemical weapons, and the establishment of basic human rights and democracy in Libya.
    During our time in this committee, The Republic of Korea would support any resolutions that would advocate for the establishment of democracies or a resolution that focuses on the causes that allow authoritarian regimes to rise, and find a solution to end these issues. With this in mind, it is imperative that the threat of Authoritarianism is neutralized, to prevent further dangerous regimes being established, and threatening the stability of the international community.`

  • Xochitl
    Xochitl November 16, 2017 Reply

    Country: Rwanda
    Committee: UNDP
    subject: Authoritarianism and Democracy
    School: Kalamazoo Central HS

  • avatar image
    Richard Li November 16, 2017 Reply

    Committee: United Nations Development Program
    Topic: Authoritarianism and Democracy
    Country: The Kingdom of Spain
    Delegate: Richard Li

    The founding documents of the United Nations (UN) are based on the importance of democracy (Universal Declaration of Human Rights). Democracy is the key to human advancements. However significant problems in recent years including the rise of authoritarian governments and election rigging all hindered justice and in turn slowed down the progress of the society.
    Spain has signed the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) Charter, one of the first significant resolutions passed by the UN emphasizing the need for a free, democratic government. Spain is also the eighth largest donor to the UN Democracy Fund (UNDEF). These actions earned Spain the title as the seventh most democratic nation on Earth in 2016 (Project Database). Spain’s democratic government overthrow their tyrannical government, which once overthrew Spain’s democratic government (Spain Profile).
    The government of Spain is a government ruled by the parliament, however, this political system is a constitutional monarchy. Spain has recently been criticized by UN experts stating Spanish authorities ought to ensure that measures taken ahead of the Catalan referendum on the 1st of October do not interfere with the fundamental rights to the freedom of expression, assembly, association, and public participation (OHCHR). Spain does not recognize Catalonia’s independence referendum declaring the election illegitimate (Hunt, Darren). Spain has stated that Russia has meddled with the Catalonian vote (Cotovio, Vasco, and Emanuella Grinberg). Spain supports the preservation of democracies. Spain has also recently rebuked Filipino autocrat Rodrigo Duarte, as the Philippine leader has criticized Spain for “controlling the Philippines.” (Duterte Explains How Spain, US Controlled PH through Unitary Government)
    Democracies are only powerful when voters are educated and well informed of their choices. Less censorship of information, such as news and political positions, is the first step to ensure more informed voters. Spain also encourages the promotion of political participation from a country’s citizens. Spain believes Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) such as Transparency International will help to prevent corruption in elections. Election meddling is also an issue that must be dealt with force. Spain supports strict punishments to nations or organizations that have been caught meddling in elections.
    Works Cited
    Cotovio, Vasco, and Emanuella Grinberg. “Spain Says Interference in Catalonia Vote Came from Russia.” CNN, Cable News Network, 13 Nov. 2017.
    “Duterte Explains How Spain, US Controlled PH through Unitary Government.” Politiko, 13 Dec. 2016.
    Hunt, Darren. “Catalonia: ‘Spain Is Not a Democracy!’ Independence Campaigner Lashes EU for Inaction.” Express.co.uk, Express.co.uk, 4 Oct. 2017.
    “Project Database | UNDEF.” United Nations, United Nations.
    “Spain Must Respect Fundamental Rights in Response to Catalan Referendum.” OHCHR | Spain Must Respect Fundamental Rights in Response to Catalan Referendum, UN Rights Experts, UN Human Rights, 28 Sept. 2017.
    “Spain Profile – Timeline.” BBC News, BBC, 21 Aug. 2017.
    “Universal Declaration of Human Rights.” United Nations, United Nations.

  • Xochitl
    Xochitl November 16, 2017 Reply

    Country: Rwanda
    Committee: UNDP
    subject: Authoritarianism and Democracy
    School: Kalamazoo Central HS
    The many unsuccessful attempts at democracy throughout countries is a not a major concern to Rwanda and our own recovery from genocide and strong executive government has continued throughout the past decade. We do promote democracy in our country however, for the sake of stability, our focus has been on creating peaceful ties and trade relations with other countries as opposed to directly making attempts towards changing their systems of government. We know that an unstable economy and other such internal instability can cause Authoritarian government to prevail and believe that strengthening the countries through peaceful relationships in things such as trade could aid in creating more successful attempts at democracy throughout other nations.

  • Emiliapaeseler
    Emiliapaeseler November 21, 2017 Reply

    November 11, 2017
    SUBMITTED TO: UNDP
    FROM: Chad
    SUBJECT: Authoritarianism and Democracy

    In the past two hundred plus years the democracy was established in many countries as
    the political system. Founded in Greece the democracy showed the advantages in the
    social life.
    We are one of 123 democracies in the world. Democracies become more and more relevant for a well working economic system in each country.
    How can we establish stable democracies instead of take over authoritarianism which stagnate economic growth?

    Authoritarianism and Democracy are two different political systems which are both represented in the world; however, Chad believes in the democracy as the way to the best way to establish a strong economy. Crucial in dealing with the complexities of democracy, good governance must act with solidarity and responsibility. Chad believes involving citizens in especially local elections help people exercise their rights and freedoms.

    What steps should be taken in order to help democracies achieves stability?
    How do we bring authoritarianism back over to democracy politics?

    Chad believes longer term presidents will maintain a more stable democracy.
    In addition, education will help to improve the understanding of democracy and economics. An informed public will create engagement, which helps encourage economic development.
    As an country which has been a member of the United Nations for a long time, Chad is willing to help establish democracies, to established economies and increase world trade as a result.

Leave a reply