Explanatory Blog Post #1

The article Political “Competition and Economic Growth” written by Bruce Bueno de Mesquita, James D. Morrow, Randolph Siverson, and Alastair Smith endeavours to explain the idea that political competition promotes economic growth within countries. The particular focus is on how resources are distributed in different countries and/or different regimes in which the competition of opposition is absent.   These allocations of resources are pivotal in how positions of power are held or kept over time due to the ways these leaders allocate and distribute resources. The article also uses two critical parts of practically any political system, the selectorate and the winning coalition, as to how it is that these institutions play a part in the all important allocation of resources.

The selectorate is best described as those who have a say, or the ability in which to elect a new leader. The selectorate in this case is easier to see in democratic systems as for example, as they are essentially a body of people whom are responsible for making a selection. In a democratic system as New Zealand this should be, and for the most part are the voters (general public).  Following the democratic example the winning collation is best described as a group of the selectorate (different sizes in different political regimes) in which helps to keep the ruler in power. Again under the New Zealand democracy it would consist of the voters in which their support is crucial in order for the said party or person to remain in power. In other political systems such as autocracy these winning coalitions are usually much smaller, as these lesser distinct numbers are required to keep rulers n power, e.g in times of coup it is only necessary to have the support of the military generals etc rather than that of the voting public. However despite the sizes of the winning coalition, the support of the coalition is essential in maintaining power, and so those in power grant special privileges to the winning coalitions in order to maintain their support.

This idea that special privileges are assigned to those in the winning coalition is where the idea of resource allocation derives from. Those in power wish to maintain their status and therefore require the support of the winning coalition. These coalitions vary in sizes and form, in a democratic sense the best approach taken in awarding such a vast number of people is to assign the resources in which the ruler holds, into deriving the desired policy and bettering societal welfare systems. Whilst public goods such as rights, security and so on are enjoyed by all of the people, private goods are only subject to those of the winning coalition in a way that opens doors in which could allow business deals, black marketing and other specific reserves which benefit them more as individuals. Those in power decide how much of each sector should have resources allocated and in terms of the winning coalitions view, as long as the benefits they get from giving support to this leader outweigh the benefits they would rep if they were to give their support to opposition.

Whilst this is only a brief view into understanding how resources and there allocation play a part in political systems and the leaders in which hold power, we can already begin to understand that throughout all of the political regimes, the ability to have control over the distribution of resources is detrimental to remaining in power. This can be seen from the democratic government in which needs to allocate resources into passing public policies in which their voters hold high value in, to keep their support. Or even right down to countries in which corrupt, military have the rule and use these resources in which to keep the select few men of power happy and fulfilled in a more direct and individual means, so that they will not move to oppose those who are ruling in any way. The other intergral point in this reading, is the notion of outside, or other, political competition puts strain on the power in party in which arguably causes the party in power to not be able to afford to allocate themselves so many private resources. 

300238007