Political Stability With a Mathematical Eye

by Muhammad Naveed Tahir 3 March 2009

Let us suppose that there is a small underdeveloped country X with Pi political parties where i ranges from 1 to 10.1 . Political Stability S is a function of will for democracyof these political parties either they are in the government or in the opposition. so mathematically. S = f (i Pi ) (1)

where i denotes the weight of the will of the political party for stability, its quanication is a dicult task as subjectivity involves in it , however, the variables that can be used to have a fair idea regarding the will for stability includes , fair criticism, aviodance from confrontation , strikes and sit-ins etc etc. So the political situation is the outcome of the combined will of the political entities, mathematically,
10

S=
i=1

i Pi

(2)

Now we come out the utopia of collective will of Government and Opposition for political stability rather we say that this particular small country works under the system where the opposition is always a force that creates instability.So there is political stability if
10

i Pi > 0
i=1

(3)

and otherwise if

10

i Pi < 0
i=1

(4)

and model is inconclusive if

10

i Pi = 0
i=1

(5)

unless we introduce another varible in the model.2 So for we have assumed that the political canvass of this country is exclusively determined by the politicion of the country but this is not the case with actually there are some other forces that also play a crucial role in the political fate of the country so we introduce two variables in our model and model becomes S = f (i Pi , F, E) (6)

where F and E represent Army and Establishment respectively and , are weights assigned to them.3 It is conjuncture that the weight for is determind
represents atleast 95 percent seats in the upper house dene stability if govt. is not changed, of course, it is the weak form of stability as there may be lot of sit-ins ans strikes but govt. does not change. 3 To my understanding any person who is at the helm of aair or even just sitting in his house but can have great impact individually on decisions regrding political scene of the country is a part of establishment, may be bureaucracy, technocracy, landlord, agencies etc.ect.
2 we 1 10

by the people of that soverign country and generally takes dierent values for each party in each election but the the wight of army and etablishment is defacto determined by the system and almost equal to the total weight of all the political parties4 .So there is political stability if
10

S=
i=1

i Pi F E > 0

(7)

Ok, let us take the inconclusive situation where

10

i Pi = 0
i=1

(8)

this is no longer inconclusive as the two democracy-suppressing forces have been introduced, rather the situation is worse because even if opposition has far less weight than the ruling party instability can be order of the day because of these forces. There may be some political analysts thinking that even if army and establishment wants to do the unfair with the law making body but general public is showing a resentment to thier obnoxious act, these two democracysuppresssing forces will not dare intervene in the system and let the politicians decide. Yes , theoratically you are right, but the general public is really a general commodity in this country and has not the power to keep army and establishment aside from the game of politics. Now we move toward situation, keeping the model in mind model proposes following steps to gain cherished goal of political stability. Make = 0, it will render the role of establishment in politics zero. That is basically to compell the agencies to play within their dened role. Make = 0, that is the role of the army is to protect the border. Eliminate any possibility of dictatorship whatever the situation is. So we are again at our basic model where the whole game is in the hands of politicians. The main points here are, 1. if we assume sanity prevails in the opposition parties, then there is no problem. 2. cetain people say that let the politicians decide and with the passage of time parties will become politically mature and issue of changing the government before completion of its tenure will come to an end, they are not wrong. But according to my opinion, the above process (ponit second) will take a long time , I think(wish) that there should be two party system. The parties who
4 The

role of World Powers has not been considered for simplicity

have more common points in their manifestation should become single one. Why? actually when you have more parties and there is not a single party with clear-cut 2/3 majority to form the government, then trade of horses ( horse trading ) crops up and a lot of energy and money is dissipated to purchase them and then to keep them (in)stable. But these horses can go for a walk and can make forward block and create problems of instability. Of course, this( the wish for two party system) seems ideal one but wish I am of the viewpoint that the earlier such a country has two party system the better it is. Under former approach system converges to stability slowly although it is close to the actual situation of the country under discussion whereas the latter one is less probbale but a quick x for system to converge. To achieve convergence in near future either the sanity should develope a friendship with the politicians or the politicians should become allergic of insanity . The future analyst can improve upon by introducing World Powers or dwell upon the subject like democracy within the parties and the worth of prime minister vs the president and perhaps issuance of ordinances is among the good variables in this regard.