In comparative politics, the state is considered a central institution. Primarily, it is because of the features that characterize a state. The authority within a state is centralized to one body which is the government. There are defined geographical boundaries where the power can be used. In many instances, a state has monopolistic power and ownership over its policies, armies, or even the militia group. There is also the defined political institution that characterizes a state. State power refers to the capacity of the state to enforce the law in its defined territory. State power emanates from various sources. It can come from the citizens through an election. On the other hand, it can be self-imposed by an individual or even a group of people. States use its power to enhance peace and security in their country. The state power is also for the protection of trade and the general well-being of the people.

There are three distinct nations that can  used plagiarismcheck to illustrate the state as the central institution. The illustration uses three states, the subject of the Opium trade and gang activities.  The first one is Japan. It has a government that acts as the central institution of governance. It is however considered an absent state because it gave room for criminal groups to develop. Consequently, as the bodyguard of its citizens, the state failed. The criminal groups noticed their laxity took advantage and used violence to seek control over territory. The state of Japan hence formed a coercive partner with the gang.

The second state that illustrates the centralized institution is Turkey. In the opium trade, the state of Turkey acted as the centralized institution that would respond to the pressure of the international community. The profit emanating from Opium was high and they used it. However, the gangs in Turkey were nonviolent. They had the capital for the trade. The state as the central authority hence influenced their relationship with the gang through offering support.

The last state is Finland. As the central authority, it prohibited alcohol between 1912 and 1932. Smuggling gangs emerged to counter the law. However, they refused to partner with the gang. Instead, they used their power to safeguard the public and also promote the civil guard. Evidently, the use of power to protect citizens is an example that illustrates the end of state power.

Question 2

There is a thin line between the democratic and authoritarian regimes. It is because; few countries express the ideal democratic society where the supreme power is in the hands of the people. Primarily, they depict a flawed democratic state or a restricted authoritarian regime. In an authoritarian regime, the concentration of power is in the hands of one particular leader or even a political party. The citizens are expected to submit to the authority. The freedom of the citizens is greatly limited. For example, an authoritarian regime has control over media freedom. There is suppression of dissent, hostility towards the opposition, abuse of resources of the state, and single-party domination, especially in times of election.

For example, South Africa is a nation exhibiting flawed democracy. The opposition parties are stigmatized by the ruling parties and blamed for possibly bringing back apartheid. There are cases of dissents and protests in SA. The ruling party itself is under strict mandate from within. They say that the discipline is aimed at maintaining the unity of the party. For instance, any ANC president that has challenged ANC economic views is considered as a leftist and counter-revolutionary. Rwanda through the RPF party is another example of a democratic state turned authoritarian but in the restricted course. For instance, those who do not buy into the RPF ideologies are termed as backward. Such people are also vulnerable to material policing. Moreover, those against RPF are viewed as genocide deniers. In fact, they are termed as enemies of Rwanda and eliminated through violence a term viewed as the Rwanda clean-up action. Uganda under the National Resistance Movement is another example. The party uses a similar strategy of concentrating power in the hands of the party leader leading to productive liminality. Those who resist it are viewed as enemies of progress.

Question three

People are likely to forgo peaceful methods of political change and instead use violent methods because of various reasons. Primarily, it is important to note that the revolutionary changes in the world have occurred at the point of violence. First, it is the ultimate means of expressing one's desire for freedom. In essence, the recognition that risking one’s own life to have life is the central argument. Violence is necessary in history when it comes to the recognition of human freedom. Human beings desire to be known and accepted. So important in recognition of human freedom that the readiness for a person to sacrifice his life to attain freedom leads to violence. Secondly, peaceful negotiations have always been ignored and trumped upon. Further, the oppressors are moved by violence in many cases as is evident during the colonization period.

In Germany, the Nazi regime took total control of the state causing the massive killing of its people. So brutal was the regime and there was a need for counter-brutality in the form of violence to do away with the regime. In Kenya, where the white settlers were in total control, ordinary talks could bear no fruits. The Kenyans were made slaves in their own country. It is the proliferation of the guerrilla movement in Kenya that gave birth to Independence. The same case resonated in South Africa which suffered for decades under the Apartheid. While negotiations occurred, the guerilla movement led to the emergence of a democratic South Africa.