Summary of Barbara F. Walter's How Civil Wars Start

Everest Media

Description

Please note: This is a companion version & not the original book.
Sample Book Insights:
#1 Noor was a high school sophomore in Baghdad when U. S. forces invaded Iraq on March 19, 2003. She had seen her country’s leader, Saddam Hussein, condemn U. president George W. Bush on TV for threatening war, and she had heard her family talking around the dinner table about a possible American invasion.
#2 When Saddam was captured, researchers did not celebrate. They knew that democratization, especially rapid democratization in a deeply divided country, could be highly destabilizing.
#3 As Sunnis began to feel disenfranchised by the new democratic government, insurgent groups began to form. They aimed to reduce or eliminate support for the U. S. occupation and isolate the American military.
#4 The world has experienced the greatest expansion of freedom and political rights in the history of mankind. Democracies are less likely to go to war against their fellow citizens and against citizens in other democracies.

Sujets

• Ideology
• Democracy

Informations

• Publié par: Everest Media LLC
• Date de parution: 22 mars 2022
• Nombre de lectures: 0
• EAN13: 9781669357346
• Langue: English
• Poids de l'ouvrage: 1 Mo

Extrait

Insights on Barbara F. Walter's How Civil Wars Start
Contents Insights from Chapter 1 Insights from Chapter 2 Insights from Chapter 3 Insights from Chapter 4 Insights from Chapter 5 Insights from Chapter 6 Insights from Chapter 7 Insights from Chapter 8
Insights from Chapter 1

#1

Noor was a high school sophomore in Baghdad when U. S. forces invaded Iraq on March 19, 2003. She had seen her country’s leader, Saddam Hussein, condemn U. president George W. Bush on TV for threatening war, and she had heard her family talking around the dinner table about a possible American invasion.

#2

When Saddam was captured, researchers did not celebrate. They knew that democratization, especially rapid democratization in a deeply divided country, could be highly destabilizing.

#3

As Sunnis began to feel disenfranchised by the new democratic government, insurgent groups began to form. They aimed to reduce or eliminate support for the U. S. occupation and isolate the American military.

#4

The world has experienced the greatest expansion of freedom and political rights in the history of mankind. Democracies are less likely to go to war against their fellow citizens and against citizens in other democracies.

#5

The road to democracy is a dangerous one. When scholars began collecting data on civil wars, in the early nineties, they noticed a correlation: since 1946, the number of democracies in the world had surged, but so had the number of civil wars.

#6

The Polity Project, a nonprofit that supports research and quantitative analysis on democracy and political violence, has compiled a dataset that classifies countries as democracies, autocracies, or anocracies.

#7

Anocracies are in the middle, receiving a score of between −5 and +5. In anocracies, citizens get some elements of democratic rule, but they also get presidents with lots of authoritarian powers.

#8

When a government is democratizing, it is weak compared to the previous regime. Because the new government is often fragile, and the rule of law is still developing, the losers — former elites, opposition leaders, and citizens who once enjoyed privileges — are not sure if the administration will be fair or protect them.

#9

The faster and more radical the reforms, the greater the chance of civil war. democratization often leads to instability, and civil wars typically break out in the first two years after reform is attempted.

#10

Until recently, the way countries ended up in the dangerous anocracy zone was when dictators were overthrown or autocrats were forced to embrace democratic reform due to mass protests. But after almost half a century of increasing democratization, countries began to move in the opposite direction.

#11

Autocracies often begin to decay when their citizens become too complacent with the government’s actions. This moment of peak risk occurs when a country’s government is at its weakest in terms of both institutional strength and legitimacy.