Comparison of Mexico and Nigeria
The Adventure to Democracy
301100190
Simon Fraser University
The Adventure to Democracy
In the midst of the prevalence of democratic transitions, a number of developing countries are seeking to achieve the successful consolidation of civil order in modern days. Among those participants, Mexico and Nigeria has been spotlighted for the completely contrastive endings at the end of their long-adventures towards democratization since their independence; Mexico, from its independence, has maintained the political stability despite the authoritarian single-party regime and even accomplished the solid democratization at the time of the 2000 election whereas Nigerian regime has been deteriorated by a series of military cues d’états and internal political corruptions which made previous attempts to democratize in vain. The root cause of the different dynamics in Mexico and Nigeria is the composition of population. Since post-independence history, Nigeria has been indecisive whether to stay in military regime or to return to democracy. The nature of its dilemma was heterogeneity which segregates the countries into shattered pieces. However comparing to the complexity in Nigeria, the population of Mexico comprised of relatively a small number of ethnic groups has prioritized the national development before taking the advantage of its own ethnic groups. Mexicans’ patriotism considerably contributed to its peaceful and successful restoration of democracy. This paper will analyze the main drawbacks of Nigeria to accomplish a civil society obstructed by the diversity in ethnicity, and at once provide how Mexico’s overwhelmed those problems.
Staying under the power of a single party First of all, the domination of Hausa-Fulani in Nigeria has exacerbated the political splits in terms of ethno-regional cleavage while the authoritarian party known as PRI had rendered the strong foundation of democracy in Mexico. From pre-independence time, Nigeria has been dominated by
301100190
Simon Fraser University
The Adventure to Democracy
In the midst of the prevalence of democratic transitions, a number of developing countries are seeking to achieve the successful consolidation of civil order in modern days. Among those participants, Mexico and Nigeria has been spotlighted for the completely contrastive endings at the end of their long-adventures towards democratization since their independence; Mexico, from its independence, has maintained the political stability despite the authoritarian single-party regime and even accomplished the solid democratization at the time of the 2000 election whereas Nigerian regime has been deteriorated by a series of military cues d’états and internal political corruptions which made previous attempts to democratize in vain. The root cause of the different dynamics in Mexico and Nigeria is the composition of population. Since post-independence history, Nigeria has been indecisive whether to stay in military regime or to return to democracy. The nature of its dilemma was heterogeneity which segregates the countries into shattered pieces. However comparing to the complexity in Nigeria, the population of Mexico comprised of relatively a small number of ethnic groups has prioritized the national development before taking the advantage of its own ethnic groups. Mexicans’ patriotism considerably contributed to its peaceful and successful restoration of democracy. This paper will analyze the main drawbacks of Nigeria to accomplish a civil society obstructed by the diversity in ethnicity, and at once provide how Mexico’s overwhelmed those problems.
Staying under the power of a single party First of all, the domination of Hausa-Fulani in Nigeria has exacerbated the political splits in terms of ethno-regional cleavage while the authoritarian party known as PRI had rendered the strong foundation of democracy in Mexico. From pre-independence time, Nigeria has been dominated by